Five police officers from California police force have sued Palo Alto city over Black Lives Matter mural. Their contention is that the mural has anti-police theme and amounted to discrimination, Harassment and retaliation. The officers have held the city responsible for letting the mural form.

News of the lawsuit was first given by Palo Alto Daily Post.

The mural was made on the street during protests over George Floyd's death. George Floyd was and African American man who passed away as a white police officer pressed his knee on his throat while detaining him.

The incident had caused widespread protest against police force that was often considered to use exxcessive force while dealing with people of African-American descent.

As per news reports, the mural was to be removed last November but it hasn't been.

The lawsuit points out that the mural includes logo of New Black Panthers which is categorised as a hate group by Southern Poverty Law Center

The center says that the group encourages violence against police officers, Jews and whites.

Five police officers from California police force have sued Palo Alto city over Black Lives Matter mural. Their contention is that the mural has anti-police theme and amounted to discrimination, Harassment and retaliation.

Five police officers from California police force have sued Palo Alto city over Black Lives Matter mural. Their contention is that the mural has anti-police theme and amounted to discrimination, Harassment and retaliation. The officers have held the city responsible for letting the mural form. News of the lawsuit was first given by Palo Alto Daily Post. The mural was made on the street during protests over George Floyd's death. George Floyd was and African American man who passed away as a white police officer pressed his knee on his throat while detaining him. The incident had caused widespread protest against police force that was often considered to use exxcessive force while dealing with people of African-American descent. As per news reports, the mural was to be removed last November but it hasn't been. The lawsuit points out that the mural includes logo of New Black Panthers which is categorised as a hate group by Southern Poverty Law Center The center says that the group encourages violence against police officers, Jews and whites.

California cops sue Palo Alto city over Black Lives Matter mural

Jabir McKnight woke up on the morning of Jan. 6 with an uneasy feeling.

The day before had been great: He and another congressional staff member had celebrated Founders Day for their historically Black fraternity, Kappa Alpha Psi. But as McKnight walked that Wednesday to Capitol Hill, where he had always felt safe, images of white supremacist violence in Charleston, South Carolina, and Charlottesville, Virginia, began to race through his head.

Hours before the violent pro-Trump mob rampaged through the halls of Congress, leaving nearly 140 police officers injured and five people dead, McKnight recalled, he could not shake the sense that something very bad was about to happen.

“The writing was on the wall for this,” said McKnight, 23, who is the communications director for Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas.

He pointed to examples of right-wing violence in recent months and years. “For Black staffers, it’s a little bit different, because a lot of these attacks are directed toward our people,” he said. “We’ve seen these things happen over and over and over again. I don’t think we were blinded that people who are domestic terrorists would say, ‘Oh, it’s the Capitol, we’ll stop there.’”

Symbols of racism and white supremacy were on full display at the Capitol on Jan. 6. Rioters paraded the Confederate battle flag through the halls. One man wore a “Camp Auschwitz” sweatshirt, others flew the flag of the fictional country Kekistan, which mimics a Nazi war flag.

Black Capitol Police officers have described the intense racism they endured from the mob; one told Buzzfeed News he was called a racist slur 15 times, causing him to break down in tears.

Only a small percentage of congressional aides are Black. Since the attack, McKnight and others who were in nearby offices in the Capitol complex that day have been talking among themselves about how close the violence came to them, what it means to experience such a virulent expression of racism in what is supposed to be a citadel of liberty, and the suspicion they now feel toward other aides, members of Congress and random people they encounter as they go about their business on Capitol Hill.

“It makes the trauma worse,” McKnight said. “Because as you’re walking around, you don’t know who could have been involved with what.”

For some Black staff members, the Capitol attack brought back memories of how they had tried to avoid people they felt could be prone to racist violence — only to find them at their place of work.

“This was the ugliest display of racism that I’ve seen ever. And I’m from the South,” says Remmington Belford, 30, the communications director for Rep. Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y. “There’s a specific demographic of people that you know conduct themselves that way, and you find your way away from them. Those people came to Capitol Hill. The people who believe in supremacy due to genetics were on Capitol Hill, and they were armed, and they were incensed.”

The staff members described feelings of fear about the physical threat and anger about the psychic damage done by the mob.

“I never though I’d see the Confederate flag walked through the halls of Congress,” said Mike McQuerry, 50, the communications director for Delegate Stacey Plaskett, D-Virgin Islands and an impeachment manager in the trial of former President Donald Trump. “As much as we think we’ve had progress, we haven’t progressed that much.”

McQuerry said that white rioters, using force and rage, gained access to parts of the Capitol that had always been off-limits to him, like Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office or the floor of the Senate.

“Those insurgents got to places where we as staffers couldn’t go,” he said, “places we wouldn’t even think about going.”

McKnight, Belford and McQuerry watched the worst of the violence from fortified offices in the Rayburn Building on the House side of the Capitol complex.

“The fear was very present,” Belford said, adding that he had planned two escape routes, including rushing through a window. “As far as close? They were steps away. Let’s be very clear. There’s no force that protects us in Rayburn” once the rioters breached the Capitol.

“We were fortified in our offices,” McKnight said. “You don’t know what’s on the other side of the door. You never knew what was on the other side. We were worried about any sound we heard. Are they here? Are they in the building? The only time you would have known is when it was too late. Everyone was terrified.”

As they watched the mayhem that day, the aides said, they feared for their lives, realizing that not only lawmakers could be attacked but so could they.

After the siege, congressional aides have reported trouble sleeping and feeling anxious, claustrophobic, angry and depressed. Lawmakers have requested additional resources to support the mental health needs of employees in response to surging demand.

“It was the first time I realized that post-traumatic stress syndrome is a thing,” said Belford, who is from Houston. “We as staffers are still dealing with the trauma.”

Despite what they experienced that day, McQuerry, who is from Detroit, said staff members felt an obligation to push on with work.

“There’s not that many of us that work up here,” he said of Black aides to members of Congress. “It’s affected us tremendously. We have to just push through. I think we deal with it every day. PTSD is really real.”

During the riot, some Democratic lawmakers said they thought they might be able to blend in with Republican members of Congress to avoid the violence. Rep. Dean Phillips, D-Minn., said recently on the House floor that he recognized his privilege when this thought occurred to him.

“Within moments, I realized that blending in was not an option available to our colleagues color,” he said. “So I’m here tonight to say to my brothers and sisters in Congress, and all around our country: I’m sorry. I’m sorry. For I had never understood, really understood, what privilege really means.”

Aides who represent members of color said they were well aware that Black lawmakers could be targeted because “our members are some of the most vocal against Trump’s harmful and divisive practices,” Belford said. “The fear was very present. We cannot blend in. We cannot not be visible. Our skin color often becomes a target.”

They were reminded this week of the threats to lawmakers when a top security official suggested on Tuesday that members of Congress consider upgrading their home security systems to include panic buttons and key fobs. In a lengthy memo sent to House lawmakers and their aides, Timothy Blodgett, the acting sergeant-at-arms, reiterated measures that he advised lawmakers to take to protect their Washington and district offices as well as their homes.

The guidance — which encouraged refraining from posting about lawmakers’ appearances at events until after they have “safely left,” using special hoods to reduce exposure to “harmful materials” sent by mail and installing panic buttons in lawmakers’ homes — starkly illustrated the continuing shock waves after the Jan. 6 attack.

Lawmakers have received briefings on a handful of specific active threats to the Capitol and to members after the attack, and court documents have detailed plans by individuals in the pro-Trump mob to kill specific members of Congress.

One man threatened to put “a bullet” in Pelosi’s head “on Live TV,”; another threatened to assassinate Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., that day, according to federal prosecutors.

McKnight, who is from Philadelphia, said he had spoken with colleagues who felt shocked after moving to Washington.

“So where can you go?” McKnight said. “You just moved to D.C. to work in politics and be in a safe environment, and now that’s changed.”

As traumatizing as the riot was, the staff members said they had also received an outpouring of support.

During the attack, Plaskett posted on Twitter a photograph of her staff, including McQuerry, telling the public they were safe. McQuerry said he received a flood of texts containing messages such as “I love you” and “be safe.”

McKnight said he was also inundated with support from friends, family and acquaintances.

“We could have lost our lives,” he said. “Not only were people watching, but people cared.”

Jabir McKnight woke up on the morning of Jan. 6 with an uneasy feeling. The day before had been great: He and another congressional staff member had celebrated Founders Day for their historically Black fraternity, Kappa Alpha Psi.

Jabir McKnight woke up on the morning of Jan. 6 with an uneasy feeling. The day before had been great: He and another congressional staff member had celebrated Founders Day for their historically Black fraternity, Kappa Alpha Psi. But as McKnight walked that Wednesday to Capitol Hill, where he had always felt safe, images of white supremacist violence in Charleston, South Carolina, and Charlottesville, Virginia, began to race through his head. Hours before the violent pro-Trump mob rampaged through the halls of Congress, leaving nearly 140 police officers injured and five people dead, McKnight recalled, he could not shake the sense that something very bad was about to happen. “The writing was on the wall for this,” said McKnight, 23, who is the communications director for Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas. He pointed to examples of right-wing violence in recent months and years. “For Black staffers, it’s a little bit different, because a lot of these attacks are directed toward our people,” he said. “We’ve seen these things happen over and over and over again. I don’t think we were blinded that people who are domestic terrorists would say, ‘Oh, it’s the Capitol, we’ll stop there.’” Symbols of racism and white supremacy were on full display at the Capitol on Jan. 6. Rioters paraded the Confederate battle flag through the halls. One man wore a “Camp Auschwitz” sweatshirt, others flew the flag of the fictional country Kekistan, which mimics a Nazi war flag. Black Capitol Police officers have described the intense racism they endured from the mob; one told Buzzfeed News he was called a racist slur 15 times, causing him to break down in tears. Only a small percentage of congressional aides are Black. Since the attack, McKnight and others who were in nearby offices in the Capitol complex that day have been talking among themselves about how close the violence came to them, what it means to experience such a virulent expression of racism in what is supposed to be a citadel of liberty, and the suspicion they now feel toward other aides, members of Congress and random people they encounter as they go about their business on Capitol Hill. “It makes the trauma worse,” McKnight said. “Because as you’re walking around, you don’t know who could have been involved with what.” For some Black staff members, the Capitol attack brought back memories of how they had tried to avoid people they felt could be prone to racist violence — only to find them at their place of work. “This was the ugliest display of racism that I’ve seen ever. And I’m from the South,” says Remmington Belford, 30, the communications director for Rep. Yvette Clarke, D-N.Y. “There’s a specific demographic of people that you know conduct themselves that way, and you find your way away from them. Those people came to Capitol Hill. The people who believe in supremacy due to genetics were on Capitol Hill, and they were armed, and they were incensed.” The staff members described feelings of fear about the physical threat and anger about the psychic damage done by the mob. “I never though I’d see the Confederate flag walked through the halls of Congress,” said Mike McQuerry, 50, the communications director for Delegate Stacey Plaskett, D-Virgin Islands and an impeachment manager in the trial of former President Donald Trump. “As much as we think we’ve had progress, we haven’t progressed that much.” McQuerry said that white rioters, using force and rage, gained access to parts of the Capitol that had always been off-limits to him, like Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office or the floor of the Senate. “Those insurgents got to places where we as staffers couldn’t go,” he said, “places we wouldn’t even think about going.” McKnight, Belford and McQuerry watched the worst of the violence from fortified offices in the Rayburn Building on the House side of the Capitol complex. “The fear was very present,” Belford said, adding that he had planned two escape routes, including rushing through a window. “As far as close? They were steps away. Let’s be very clear. There’s no force that protects us in Rayburn” once the rioters breached the Capitol. “We were fortified in our offices,” McKnight said. “You don’t know what’s on the other side of the door. You never knew what was on the other side. We were worried about any sound we heard. Are they here? Are they in the building? The only time you would have known is when it was too late. Everyone was terrified.” As they watched the mayhem that day, the aides said, they feared for their lives, realizing that not only lawmakers could be attacked but so could they. After the siege, congressional aides have reported trouble sleeping and feeling anxious, claustrophobic, angry and depressed. Lawmakers have requested additional resources to support the mental health needs of employees in response to surging demand. “It was the first time I realized that post-traumatic stress syndrome is a thing,” said Belford, who is from Houston. “We as staffers are still dealing with the trauma.” Despite what they experienced that day, McQuerry, who is from Detroit, said staff members felt an obligation to push on with work. “There’s not that many of us that work up here,” he said of Black aides to members of Congress. “It’s affected us tremendously. We have to just push through. I think we deal with it every day. PTSD is really real.” During the riot, some Democratic lawmakers said they thought they might be able to blend in with Republican members of Congress to avoid the violence. Rep. Dean Phillips, D-Minn., said recently on the House floor that he recognized his privilege when this thought occurred to him. “Within moments, I realized that blending in was not an option available to our colleagues color,” he said. “So I’m here tonight to say to my brothers and sisters in Congress, and all around our country: I’m sorry. I’m sorry. For I had never understood, really understood, what privilege really means.” Aides who represent members of color said they were well aware that Black lawmakers could be targeted because “our members are some of the most vocal against Trump’s harmful and divisive practices,” Belford said. “The fear was very present. We cannot blend in. We cannot not be visible. Our skin color often becomes a target.” They were reminded this week of the threats to lawmakers when a top security official suggested on Tuesday that members of Congress consider upgrading their home security systems to include panic buttons and key fobs. In a lengthy memo sent to House lawmakers and their aides, Timothy Blodgett, the acting sergeant-at-arms, reiterated measures that he advised lawmakers to take to protect their Washington and district offices as well as their homes. The guidance — which encouraged refraining from posting about lawmakers’ appearances at events until after they have “safely left,” using special hoods to reduce exposure to “harmful materials” sent by mail and installing panic buttons in lawmakers’ homes — starkly illustrated the continuing shock waves after the Jan. 6 attack. Lawmakers have received briefings on a handful of specific active threats to the Capitol and to members after the attack, and court documents have detailed plans by individuals in the pro-Trump mob to kill specific members of Congress. One man threatened to put “a bullet” in Pelosi’s head “on Live TV,”; another threatened to assassinate Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., that day, according to federal prosecutors. McKnight, who is from Philadelphia, said he had spoken with colleagues who felt shocked after moving to Washington. “So where can you go?” McKnight said. “You just moved to D.C. to work in politics and be in a safe environment, and now that’s changed.” As traumatizing as the riot was, the staff members said they had also received an outpouring of support. During the attack, Plaskett posted on Twitter a photograph of her staff, including McQuerry, telling the public they were safe. McQuerry said he received a flood of texts containing messages such as “I love you” and “be safe.” McKnight said he was also inundated with support from friends, family and acquaintances. “We could have lost our lives,” he said. “Not only were people watching, but people cared.”

For black aides on Capitol Hill, Jan. 6 brought particular trauma

President Joe Biden has said repeatedly that he wants to create a path to citizenship for all of the 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally.

But even as he prepares to push hard for the broadest possible overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws, he and his aides have started to signal openness to more targeted approaches that could win citizenship for smaller, discrete groups of immigrants living in the United States without legal permission. At a CNN town hall Tuesday, he said such efforts would be acceptable “in the meantime.”

In a private telephone call with activists Wednesday, top immigration aides to Biden said they supported what they called a “multiple trains” strategy, which could target citizenship for “Dreamers,” the young immigrants brought into the country illegally as children; farmworkers who have toiled for years in U.S. fields; and others.

Smaller bills could move forward as the president tries to build support for the broader legislation, which is scheduled to be introduced Thursday, according to two people who were on the call.

If he chooses to move step by step, Biden appears unlikely to anger the most powerful pro-immigration groups, which are embracing a more pragmatic strategy after spectacular defeats under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

For more than two decades, activists have tried and failed to secure passage of a broad overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws that would create a path to citizenship for most immigrants living in the United States without legal permission, a faster path for Dreamers, expanded visa access for highly skilled workers and a new program for seasonal agricultural laborers.

They are betting that Biden will struggle even more than his predecessors did to win support from a Republican Party that became more anti-immigrant during the Trump administration.

While the activists are willing to let Biden try for a bipartisan deal this year, they have warned that they will not wait forever.

“We want 11 million people legalized. That is our North Star,” said Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice and a veteran of immigration wars in the nation’s capital for more than 30 years. “But we can’t come home empty-handed. We’re not going to adopt an all-or-nothing approach. We have to achieve a breakthrough.”

For those like Sharry, that is a major shift, and it could herald fierce debates over whether Democrats should use parliamentary tactics in the Senate to ram through individual immigration measures without any Republican support.

The activists are mobilizing on behalf of separate bills that would legalize Dreamers, farmworkers, immigrants granted temporary status after fleeing war and natural disasters, and “essential workers” living in the United States illegally who have been on the front lines of the coronavirus pandemic.

Publicly, the White House is insisting that Congress should pass the president’s broad immigration overhaul. Jen Psaki, White House press secretary, said this week that Biden was pushing for comprehensive changes because “they all need to be addressed — that’s why he proposed them together.”

And the chief backers of Biden’s legislation in Congress — Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey and Rep. Linda Sanchez of California — say abandoning the broader effort before it has even begun would be a mistake. Menendez and Sanchez are expected to reveal details about the president’s legislation Thursday morning after it is introduced in the House.

A Democratic aide familiar with the legislation said if immigration activists ask for only “half a loaf,” they should not be surprised when they end up going home with just a single slice of bread.

“We have an economic and moral imperative to pass big, bold and inclusive immigration reform — reform that leaves no one behind,” Menendez said Wednesday evening. He criticized advocates for not being willing to fight for legislation that would eventually legalize all the country’s immigrant population.

“We must not start with concessions out of the gate. We are not going to start with 2 million undocumented people instead of 11 million,” he said. “We will never win an argument that we don’t have the courage to make. We must make our case for bold, inclusive and lasting immigration reform.”

How to successfully revamp the nation’s immigration system has for decades eluded policymakers in Washington. The last time a major immigration bill was signed into law was in 1990, when President George Bush expanded legal immigration into the United States, before an explosion of illegal crossings at the southwestern border in the following 20 years.

The surge in illegal border crossings prompted demands for increased enforcement from conservatives even as backlogs in legal immigration created a growing crisis for businesses looking for workers and for families seeking refuge in the United States from violence and disasters at home.

For nearly three decades, those in favor of immigration have argued for a single, comprehensive bill with elements that could unite Democrats and Republicans, labor unions and big businesses, security-minded conservatives and liberal immigration supporters.

Such bills — which were introduced in 2001, 2006, 2007 and 2013 — centered around a trade-off: amped-up border security and immigration law enforcement in exchange for a path to citizenship for people living in the United States without legal permission. They also included increases in the number of temporary workers allowed into the United States, more resources for processing asylum applications, new opportunities for high-skilled workers from other countries, some limits on immigration based on family ties, and protections for people living in the United States illegally who arrived as children.

But none of those efforts succeeded. Despite support from Bush, the Senate and House failed to reach a compromise in 2006, and legislation in 2007 was defeated in the Senate. In 2013, Obama secured bipartisan Senate passage of an immigration overhaul, 68-32, only to see it ignored by the Republican-controlled House. Over the past four years, some of the conservative side of the equation — border security — was secured by President Donald Trump in the form of tough restrictions on asylum-seekers and partial construction of Trump’s border wall.

Biden won the presidency in part by pledging that he would bring back bipartisanship and saying that his long-standing relationships in the Senate would help him bridge the partisan divides that have grown deeper in recent years. Psaki said the president has outlined “the tenets of what we think the proposal should look like” in the hopes of addressing the root causes of immigration problems.

But immigration advocates say the history of failure is driving a change in strategy this year.

“You’re talking about a fight that we’ve had for over three decades at this point,” said Lorella Praeli, president of Community Change Action. “I’m not interested in a dance. I’m committed to seeing this through and delivering on concrete changes.”

Praeli and other proponents praised Biden, Menendez and Sanchez for their broader bill. But they also called on the president to promise that he would also use a budgetary tool known as reconciliation to enact smaller components of the legislation even as he pushes ahead with the larger effort.

Under Senate rules, legislation that significantly affects the nation’s budget can be passed with only a majority vote, avoiding filibuster rules that require the support of 60 senators. With the current 50-50 Senate, that would give Democrats the ability to pass reconciliation bills without Republican support and with Vice President Kamala Harris casting the tiebreaking vote — if they can stay united.

Immigration proponents say some more targeted efforts to legalize some immigrants living in the United State illegally would pass muster under the sometimes baffling rules of reconciliation, which are supposed to bar pure policy measures from bills that are supposed to deal with government taxation and spending. Because newly legalized residents would affect tax revenue and government benefits, the groups say immigration legislation could be tailored as budget measures.

Reconciliation is already being used to muscle through Biden’s $1.9 trillion pandemic relief package, but another budget measure is expected to address infrastructure funding and climate change.

“We should be included in that package,” said Sharry of America’s Voice.

Biden’s immigration efforts face even more headwinds than those of Obama and Bush.

Many Republican senators who had been supporters of immigration — including John McCain and Jeff Flake of Arizona; Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker of Tennessee; Orrin Hatch of Utah; Dean Heller of Nevada; and others — have left the Senate. Others, like Marco Rubio of Florida and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who helped negotiate previous immigration packages, shifted right in the Trump years.

Kerri Talbot, deputy director of the Immigration Hub, said that it was clear to many of the groups that Republicans cannot be counted on to support a broad overhaul of immigration without the kind of extreme measures that Trump insisted upon during his presidency. She said that pursuing smaller, popular measures like providing legalization for Dreamers would put Republicans on the spot.

“We’re always open to having a broader discussion, but absent that, we want to move forward with pieces that can pass,” she said. “We would love to have bipartisanship. I’d love to have that conversation again. But it’s really up to Republicans.”

Praeli said she and others who have fought over immigration for years believed it was time to “put the ‘W’s’ on the board” by granting a path to citizenship to as many people as they can.

“We’re in a different moment,” said Praeli, who became a citizen in 2015 after living in the United States for years without legal permission following her arrival as a small child. “We can see that Trump is no longer here, but Trumpism did not go away.”

President Joe Biden has said repeatedly that he wants to create a path to citizenship for all of the 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally.

President Joe Biden has said repeatedly that he wants to create a path to citizenship for all of the 11 million immigrants living in the United States illegally. But even as he prepares to push hard for the broadest possible overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws, he and his aides have started to signal openness to more targeted approaches that could win citizenship for smaller, discrete groups of immigrants living in the United States without legal permission. At a CNN town hall Tuesday, he said such efforts would be acceptable “in the meantime.” In a private telephone call with activists Wednesday, top immigration aides to Biden said they supported what they called a “multiple trains” strategy, which could target citizenship for “Dreamers,” the young immigrants brought into the country illegally as children; farmworkers who have toiled for years in U.S. fields; and others. Smaller bills could move forward as the president tries to build support for the broader legislation, which is scheduled to be introduced Thursday, according to two people who were on the call. If he chooses to move step by step, Biden appears unlikely to anger the most powerful pro-immigration groups, which are embracing a more pragmatic strategy after spectacular defeats under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama. For more than two decades, activists have tried and failed to secure passage of a broad overhaul of the nation’s immigration laws that would create a path to citizenship for most immigrants living in the United States without legal permission, a faster path for Dreamers, expanded visa access for highly skilled workers and a new program for seasonal agricultural laborers. They are betting that Biden will struggle even more than his predecessors did to win support from a Republican Party that became more anti-immigrant during the Trump administration. While the activists are willing to let Biden try for a bipartisan deal this year, they have warned that they will not wait forever. “We want 11 million people legalized. That is our North Star,” said Frank Sharry, executive director of America’s Voice and a veteran of immigration wars in the nation’s capital for more than 30 years. “But we can’t come home empty-handed. We’re not going to adopt an all-or-nothing approach. We have to achieve a breakthrough.” For those like Sharry, that is a major shift, and it could herald fierce debates over whether Democrats should use parliamentary tactics in the Senate to ram through individual immigration measures without any Republican support. The activists are mobilizing on behalf of separate bills that would legalize Dreamers, farmworkers, immigrants granted temporary status after fleeing war and natural disasters, and “essential workers” living in the United States illegally who have been on the front lines of the coronavirus pandemic. Publicly, the White House is insisting that Congress should pass the president’s broad immigration overhaul. Jen Psaki, White House press secretary, said this week that Biden was pushing for comprehensive changes because “they all need to be addressed — that’s why he proposed them together.” And the chief backers of Biden’s legislation in Congress — Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey and Rep. Linda Sanchez of California — say abandoning the broader effort before it has even begun would be a mistake. Menendez and Sanchez are expected to reveal details about the president’s legislation Thursday morning after it is introduced in the House. A Democratic aide familiar with the legislation said if immigration activists ask for only “half a loaf,” they should not be surprised when they end up going home with just a single slice of bread. “We have an economic and moral imperative to pass big, bold and inclusive immigration reform — reform that leaves no one behind,” Menendez said Wednesday evening. He criticized advocates for not being willing to fight for legislation that would eventually legalize all the country’s immigrant population. “We must not start with concessions out of the gate. We are not going to start with 2 million undocumented people instead of 11 million,” he said. “We will never win an argument that we don’t have the courage to make. We must make our case for bold, inclusive and lasting immigration reform.” How to successfully revamp the nation’s immigration system has for decades eluded policymakers in Washington. The last time a major immigration bill was signed into law was in 1990, when President George Bush expanded legal immigration into the United States, before an explosion of illegal crossings at the southwestern border in the following 20 years. The surge in illegal border crossings prompted demands for increased enforcement from conservatives even as backlogs in legal immigration created a growing crisis for businesses looking for workers and for families seeking refuge in the United States from violence and disasters at home. For nearly three decades, those in favor of immigration have argued for a single, comprehensive bill with elements that could unite Democrats and Republicans, labor unions and big businesses, security-minded conservatives and liberal immigration supporters. Such bills — which were introduced in 2001, 2006, 2007 and 2013 — centered around a trade-off: amped-up border security and immigration law enforcement in exchange for a path to citizenship for people living in the United States without legal permission. They also included increases in the number of temporary workers allowed into the United States, more resources for processing asylum applications, new opportunities for high-skilled workers from other countries, some limits on immigration based on family ties, and protections for people living in the United States illegally who arrived as children. But none of those efforts succeeded. Despite support from Bush, the Senate and House failed to reach a compromise in 2006, and legislation in 2007 was defeated in the Senate. In 2013, Obama secured bipartisan Senate passage of an immigration overhaul, 68-32, only to see it ignored by the Republican-controlled House. Over the past four years, some of the conservative side of the equation — border security — was secured by President Donald Trump in the form of tough restrictions on asylum-seekers and partial construction of Trump’s border wall. Biden won the presidency in part by pledging that he would bring back bipartisanship and saying that his long-standing relationships in the Senate would help him bridge the partisan divides that have grown deeper in recent years. Psaki said the president has outlined “the tenets of what we think the proposal should look like” in the hopes of addressing the root causes of immigration problems. But immigration advocates say the history of failure is driving a change in strategy this year. “You’re talking about a fight that we’ve had for over three decades at this point,” said Lorella Praeli, president of Community Change Action. “I’m not interested in a dance. I’m committed to seeing this through and delivering on concrete changes.” Praeli and other proponents praised Biden, Menendez and Sanchez for their broader bill. But they also called on the president to promise that he would also use a budgetary tool known as reconciliation to enact smaller components of the legislation even as he pushes ahead with the larger effort. Under Senate rules, legislation that significantly affects the nation’s budget can be passed with only a majority vote, avoiding filibuster rules that require the support of 60 senators. With the current 50-50 Senate, that would give Democrats the ability to pass reconciliation bills without Republican support and with Vice President Kamala Harris casting the tiebreaking vote — if they can stay united. Immigration proponents say some more targeted efforts to legalize some immigrants living in the United State illegally would pass muster under the sometimes baffling rules of reconciliation, which are supposed to bar pure policy measures from bills that are supposed to deal with government taxation and spending. Because newly legalized residents would affect tax revenue and government benefits, the groups say immigration legislation could be tailored as budget measures. Reconciliation is already being used to muscle through Biden’s $1.9 trillion pandemic relief package, but another budget measure is expected to address infrastructure funding and climate change. “We should be included in that package,” said Sharry of America’s Voice. Biden’s immigration efforts face even more headwinds than those of Obama and Bush. Many Republican senators who had been supporters of immigration — including John McCain and Jeff Flake of Arizona; Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker of Tennessee; Orrin Hatch of Utah; Dean Heller of Nevada; and others — have left the Senate. Others, like Marco Rubio of Florida and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who helped negotiate previous immigration packages, shifted right in the Trump years. Kerri Talbot, deputy director of the Immigration Hub, said that it was clear to many of the groups that Republicans cannot be counted on to support a broad overhaul of immigration without the kind of extreme measures that Trump insisted upon during his presidency. She said that pursuing smaller, popular measures like providing legalization for Dreamers would put Republicans on the spot. “We’re always open to having a broader discussion, but absent that, we want to move forward with pieces that can pass,” she said. “We would love to have bipartisanship. I’d love to have that conversation again. But it’s really up to Republicans.” Praeli said she and others who have fought over immigration for years believed it was time to “put the ‘W’s’ on the board” by granting a path to citizenship to as many people as they can. “We’re in a different moment,” said Praeli, who became a citizen in 2015 after living in the United States for years without legal permission following her arrival as a small child. “We can see that Trump is no longer here, but Trumpism did not go away.”

Biden signals he’s flexible on immigration overhaul

Millions of people in Texas continued to shiver in cold as they were forced to spend winter days with no electricity. The oil and gas capital of the US is witnessing unusual winter storm that pummeled southeastern part of the country. USA's National Weather Service (NWS) issued winter warning for areas from east Texas to the East Coast state of Maryland.

The NWS said the storm would bring ice, sleet and heavy snow to parts of Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas and Mississippi as it tracks to the northeast, causing power outages, tree damage and making driving hazardous.&nbsp;

Even though the Arctic air mass was beginning to lose its grip on an area of the country not used to such extreme cold, the frigid temperatures would continue, the NWS said.

"The Arctic air will also continue over the Plains and Mississippi Valley with temperatures of 25 to 40 degrees below average," the NWS reported Wednesday afternoon.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-snowstorm-21-people-killed-across-4-states-27-million-texas-homes-lack-power-364399/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

Storm claims lives

More than 30 storm-related deaths have been reported by media in the United States since the cold weather arrived last week, many in traffic accidents.

A man in Louisiana died when he hit his head after slipping on ice, and a 10-year-old Tennessee boy perished after he and his six-year-old sister fell through the ice into a pond Sunday.

A dozen animals -- including one 58-year-old female chimpanzee -- died during the freeze at rescue sanctuary Primarily Primates near San Antonio, the organization said on its website Wednesday.

The winter storm spawned at least four tornadoes, according to Atlanta-based weather.com, including one in North Carolina on Monday that killed at least three people and injured 10.

Across the southern border, Mexican officials said six people died after temperatures plunged.

Water shortage

Hundreds of thousands of residents of the Texas metropolis of Houston are suffering from both power outages and a loss of water pressure.

"Water pressure is very low," Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner tweeted. "Please do not run water to keep pipes from bursting."

Several Texas cities advised residents to boil their water before drinking it or using it for cooking.

David Hernandez, 38, spent the night at a Houston church with other people who have fled their homes.

"My car got stranded and I was trying to sleep in the car but it was just too cold," Hernandez said. "Liquids in my car were actually turning to ice so it was like sleeping in an ice box.

"I had to come here," he said. "There's no choice."

Power companies in Texas have implemented rolling blackouts to avoid grids being overloaded as residents crank up the heat.

According to PowerOutage.US, about 2.4 million customers were still without power by Wednesday evening in Texas, the only one of the US's 48 continental states to have its own independent power grid.

'Nearly a failed state'

Beto O'Rourke, a former Democratic presidential candidate from Texas, told MSNBC television the situation in the Lone Star State was "worse than you are hearing."

"Folks have gone days now without electricity. They're suffering," he said.

"So much of this was avoidable," O'Rourke added.&nbsp;

"The energy capital of North America cannot provide the energy needed to warm and power people's homes in this great state. We are nearing a failed state in Texas."

Austin Energy, the local power company in the capital city of 950,000, said tens of thousands of area customers were without electricity, but that they were able to start restoring power in some spots.&nbsp;

"However, this power will NOT stay on indefinitely due to anticipated grid conditions continuing," the company's Twitter account said Wednesday afternoon, warning of future rotating outages.&nbsp;

The energy company published the locations of "warming centers" set up in local schools.

(With AFP inputs)

Millions of people in Texas continued to shiver in cold as they were forced to spend winter days with no electricity. The oil and gas capital of the US is witnessing unusual winter storm that pummeled southeastern part of the country.

Millions of people in Texas continued to shiver in cold as they were forced to spend winter days with no electricity. The oil and gas capital of the US is witnessing unusual winter storm that pummeled southeastern part of the country. USA's National Weather Service (NWS) issued winter warning for areas from east Texas to the East Coast state of Maryland. The NWS said the storm would bring ice, sleet and heavy snow to parts of Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas and Mississippi as it tracks to the northeast, causing power outages, tree damage and making driving hazardous. Even though the Arctic air mass was beginning to lose its grip on an area of the country not used to such extreme cold, the frigid temperatures would continue, the NWS said. "The Arctic air will also continue over the Plains and Mississippi Valley with temperatures of 25 to 40 degrees below average," the NWS reported Wednesday afternoon. × Storm claims lives More than 30 storm-related deaths have been reported by media in the United States since the cold weather arrived last week, many in traffic accidents. A man in Louisiana died when he hit his head after slipping on ice, and a 10-year-old Tennessee boy perished after he and his six-year-old sister fell through the ice into a pond Sunday. A dozen animals -- including one 58-year-old female chimpanzee -- died during the freeze at rescue sanctuary Primarily Primates near San Antonio, the organization said on its website Wednesday. The winter storm spawned at least four tornadoes, according to Atlanta-based weather.com, including one in North Carolina on Monday that killed at least three people and injured 10. Across the southern border, Mexican officials said six people died after temperatures plunged. Water shortage Hundreds of thousands of residents of the Texas metropolis of Houston are suffering from both power outages and a loss of water pressure. "Water pressure is very low," Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner tweeted. "Please do not run water to keep pipes from bursting." Several Texas cities advised residents to boil their water before drinking it or using it for cooking. David Hernandez, 38, spent the night at a Houston church with other people who have fled their homes. "My car got stranded and I was trying to sleep in the car but it was just too cold," Hernandez said. "Liquids in my car were actually turning to ice so it was like sleeping in an ice box. "I had to come here," he said. "There's no choice." Power companies in Texas have implemented rolling blackouts to avoid grids being overloaded as residents crank up the heat. According to PowerOutage.US, about 2.4 million customers were still without power by Wednesday evening in Texas, the only one of the US's 48 continental states to have its own independent power grid. 'Nearly a failed state' Beto O'Rourke, a former Democratic presidential candidate from Texas, told MSNBC television the situation in the Lone Star State was "worse than you are hearing." "Folks have gone days now without electricity. They're suffering," he said. "So much of this was avoidable," O'Rourke added. "The energy capital of North America cannot provide the energy needed to warm and power people's homes in this great state. We are nearing a failed state in Texas." Austin Energy, the local power company in the capital city of 950,000, said tens of thousands of area customers were without electricity, but that they were able to start restoring power in some spots. "However, this power will NOT stay on indefinitely due to anticipated grid conditions continuing," the company's Twitter account said Wednesday afternoon, warning of future rotating outages. The energy company published the locations of "warming centers" set up in local schools. (With AFP inputs)

Texas continues to shiver amid power outage, more than 20 deaths reported

Arizona Republicans issued rebukes to three of the party’s most prominent figures Saturday, approving resolutions to censure Gov. Doug Ducey, former Sen. Jeff Flake and Cindy McCain, the widow of former Sen. John McCain.

Though largely symbolic, the political scolding during a meeting of the state GOP underscored a widening rift in Arizona between party officials who have made clear that their loyalty lies with former President Donald Trump and those in the party who refused to support him or his effort to overturn the election results in Arizona, which President Joe Biden won.

And, well beyond Arizona, the rift reflects the stark divisions in the Republican Party nationally in the wake of Trump’s tumultuous departure from office.

The party cited McCain’s and Flake’s criticisms of Trump and Ducey’s use of emergency orders related to the pandemic, which gave him broad control to enact policies without the Legislature’s approval such as closing “nonessential” businesses in the spring.

Both Flake and Cindy McCain endorsed Biden leading up to the November election. Though Ducey continually made it clear that he backed Trump, he drew ire from some Republicans by defending the state’s election process, rather than supporting efforts to challenge the November results in court.

John McCain was censured by the state party in 2015 over his voting record, which some Republican officials there perceived as not sufficiently conservative.

The censures came at the end of a raucous seven-hour meeting. Kelli Ward, the state party chair who has long been a Trump loyalist and a polarizing figure in Arizona politics, was reelected Saturday after playing a recorded phone call of Trump enthusiastically endorsing her.

A few Republicans speaking out in support of Ducey were booed, and nobody spoke in favor of McCain. The resolutions were approved by a wide margin.

“These resolutions are of no consequence whatsoever, and the people behind them have lost whatever little moral authority they may have once had,” Sara Mueller, Ducey’s political director, wrote in a statement issued minutes after the vote.

The party also approved resolutions staking out hard-right positions such as calls for revoking birthright citizenship, ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program, and one that “stands firm on the principles of only two genders.”

The vote to censure comes 2 1/2 months after Biden became the first Democratic presidential candidate to carry Arizona in more than two decades, and only the second Democrat in 50 years. For decades, Republicans controlled both U.S. Senate seats, but lost the first in 2018 and the second last year. Ducey, who was easily reelected in 2018, is the most prominent Republican still in office who has won statewide.

McCain, Flake and Ducey each attended Biden’s inauguration Wednesday and McCain served on the president’s transition advisory board. She has responded to the threat of censure with a sense of both annoyance and amusement, joking that she was in “good company” with her husband.

The censure resolution against McCain cited her support for “leftist causes such as gay marriage and growth of the administrative state,” and her endorsement of Biden, which was described as “in direct opposition to Republican values, the interests of the American people and the Constitution of the United States.”

On Twitter, McCain replied: “It is a high honor to be included in a group of Arizonans who have served our state and our nation so well...and who, like my late husband John, have been censured by the AZGOP. I’ll wear this as a badge of honor.”

In an earlier interview with The Arizona Republic, McCain had blasted the state party chair, Ward, for pushing for the rebukes. She said that as the chairman of the party, Ward “managed to turn Arizona blue in November for the first time since 1996.” She added: “Maybe she should be reminded that my husband never lost an Arizona election since his first win in 1982.”

Ward’s representative declined to respond to a request for comment.

The party’s resolution against Flake said that he “once was a true Conservative, who supported freedom, Republican values, Republican candidates, and Americanism” but has since “abandoned true Republican values by professing support for progressive and globalist politicians.

Flake wrote on Twitter that he, too, was unconcerned with the rebuke.

“If condoning the president’s behavior is required to stay in the party’s good graces, I’m just fine being on the outs,” he wrote.

Ducey, in an interview Friday, said he has given “little to no time to think” about the vote.

“I think we’re better and stronger as a party when we’re adding people rather than the alternative,” he said.

None of the three Republicans plan to object to the censure.

Many moderate Republican officials have dismissed the resolutions as a distraction, saying they will largely serve to alienate other moderates in a state where independent voters make up nearly one-third of the electorate.

Like other Republicans who voted against the censures, Trey Terry, a state committeeman, laid the blame with Ward.

“She has set the party up for failure,” Terry said. “It’s her circus now, and the clowns have come out.”

Next year will bring a test of the state party’s might post-Trump — a U.S. Senate seat and all statewide offices will be up for grabs.

Arizona Republicans issued rebukes to three of the party’s most prominent figures Saturday, approving resolutions to censure Gov. Doug Ducey, former Sen. Jeff Flake and Cindy McCain, the widow of former Sen.

Arizona Republicans issued rebukes to three of the party’s most prominent figures Saturday, approving resolutions to censure Gov. Doug Ducey, former Sen. Jeff Flake and Cindy McCain, the widow of former Sen. John McCain. Though largely symbolic, the political scolding during a meeting of the state GOP underscored a widening rift in Arizona between party officials who have made clear that their loyalty lies with former President Donald Trump and those in the party who refused to support him or his effort to overturn the election results in Arizona, which President Joe Biden won. And, well beyond Arizona, the rift reflects the stark divisions in the Republican Party nationally in the wake of Trump’s tumultuous departure from office. The party cited McCain’s and Flake’s criticisms of Trump and Ducey’s use of emergency orders related to the pandemic, which gave him broad control to enact policies without the Legislature’s approval such as closing “nonessential” businesses in the spring. Both Flake and Cindy McCain endorsed Biden leading up to the November election. Though Ducey continually made it clear that he backed Trump, he drew ire from some Republicans by defending the state’s election process, rather than supporting efforts to challenge the November results in court. John McCain was censured by the state party in 2015 over his voting record, which some Republican officials there perceived as not sufficiently conservative. The censures came at the end of a raucous seven-hour meeting. Kelli Ward, the state party chair who has long been a Trump loyalist and a polarizing figure in Arizona politics, was reelected Saturday after playing a recorded phone call of Trump enthusiastically endorsing her. A few Republicans speaking out in support of Ducey were booed, and nobody spoke in favor of McCain. The resolutions were approved by a wide margin. “These resolutions are of no consequence whatsoever, and the people behind them have lost whatever little moral authority they may have once had,” Sara Mueller, Ducey’s political director, wrote in a statement issued minutes after the vote. The party also approved resolutions staking out hard-right positions such as calls for revoking birthright citizenship, ending the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program, and one that “stands firm on the principles of only two genders.” The vote to censure comes 2 1/2 months after Biden became the first Democratic presidential candidate to carry Arizona in more than two decades, and only the second Democrat in 50 years. For decades, Republicans controlled both U.S. Senate seats, but lost the first in 2018 and the second last year. Ducey, who was easily reelected in 2018, is the most prominent Republican still in office who has won statewide. McCain, Flake and Ducey each attended Biden’s inauguration Wednesday and McCain served on the president’s transition advisory board. She has responded to the threat of censure with a sense of both annoyance and amusement, joking that she was in “good company” with her husband. The censure resolution against McCain cited her support for “leftist causes such as gay marriage and growth of the administrative state,” and her endorsement of Biden, which was described as “in direct opposition to Republican values, the interests of the American people and the Constitution of the United States.” On Twitter, McCain replied: “It is a high honor to be included in a group of Arizonans who have served our state and our nation so well...and who, like my late husband John, have been censured by the AZGOP. I’ll wear this as a badge of honor.” In an earlier interview with The Arizona Republic, McCain had blasted the state party chair, Ward, for pushing for the rebukes. She said that as the chairman of the party, Ward “managed to turn Arizona blue in November for the first time since 1996.” She added: “Maybe she should be reminded that my husband never lost an Arizona election since his first win in 1982.” Ward’s representative declined to respond to a request for comment. The party’s resolution against Flake said that he “once was a true Conservative, who supported freedom, Republican values, Republican candidates, and Americanism” but has since “abandoned true Republican values by professing support for progressive and globalist politicians. Flake wrote on Twitter that he, too, was unconcerned with the rebuke. “If condoning the president’s behavior is required to stay in the party’s good graces, I’m just fine being on the outs,” he wrote. Ducey, in an interview Friday, said he has given “little to no time to think” about the vote. “I think we’re better and stronger as a party when we’re adding people rather than the alternative,” he said. None of the three Republicans plan to object to the censure. Many moderate Republican officials have dismissed the resolutions as a distraction, saying they will largely serve to alienate other moderates in a state where independent voters make up nearly one-third of the electorate. Like other Republicans who voted against the censures, Trey Terry, a state committeeman, laid the blame with Ward. “She has set the party up for failure,” Terry said. “It’s her circus now, and the clowns have come out.” Next year will bring a test of the state party’s might post-Trump — a U.S. Senate seat and all statewide offices will be up for grabs.

Arizona republicans rebuke 3 influential figures

When Rep. Scott Perry joined his colleagues in a monthslong campaign to undermine the results of the presidential election, promoting “Stop the Steal” events and supporting an attempt to overturn millions of legally cast votes, he often took a back seat to higher-profile loyalists in President Donald Trump’s orbit.

But Perry, R-Pa., played a significant role in the crisis that played out at the top of the Justice Department this month, when Trump considered firing the acting attorney general and backed down only after top department officials threatened to resign en masse.

It was Perry, an outspoken member of the hard-line Freedom Caucus, who first made Trump aware that a relatively obscure Justice Department official, Jeffrey Clark, acting chief of the civil division, was sympathetic to Trump’s view that the election had been stolen, according to former administration officials who spoke with Clark and Trump.

Perry introduced the president to Clark, whose openness to conspiracy theories about election fraud presented Trump with a welcome change from the acting attorney general, Jeffrey Rosen, who stood by the results of the election and had repeatedly resisted the president’s efforts to undo them.

Perry’s previously unreported role, and the quiet discussions between Trump and Clark that followed, underlined how much the former president was willing to use the government to subvert the election, turning to more junior and relatively unknown figures for help as ranking Republicans and Cabinet members rebuffed him.

Perry’s involvement is also likely to heighten scrutiny of House Republicans who continue to advance Trump’s false and thoroughly debunked claims of election fraud, even after President Joe Biden’s inauguration this past week and as Congress prepares for an impeachment trial that will examine whether such talk incited the Capitol riot.

It is unclear when Perry, who represents the Harrisburg area, met Clark, a Philadelphia native, or how well they knew each another before the introduction to Trump. Former Trump administration officials said it was only in late December that Clark told Rosen about the introduction brokered by Perry, who was among the scores of people feeding Trump false hope that he had won the election.

But it is highly unlikely that Trump would have known Clark otherwise. Department officials were startled to learn that the president had called Clark directly on multiple occasions and that the two had met in person without alerting Rosen, those officials said. Justice Department policy stipulates that the president initially communicates with the attorney general or the deputy attorney general on all matters, and then a lower-level official if authorized.

As the date for Congress to affirm Biden’s victory neared, Perry and Clark discussed a plan to have the Justice Department send a letter to Georgia state lawmakers informing them of an investigation into voter fraud that could invalidate the state’s Electoral College results. Former officials who were briefed on the plan said that the department’s dozens of voter fraud investigations nationwide had not turned up enough instances of fraud to alter the outcome of the election.

Perry and Clark also discussed the plan with Trump, setting off a chain of events that nearly led to the ouster of Rosen, who had refused to send the letter.

After The New York Times disclosed the details of the scheme Friday, the political fallout was swift. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., incoming chairman of the Judiciary Committee, told the Justice Department in a letter Saturday that he would investigate efforts by Trump and Clark to use the agency “to further Trump’s efforts to subvert the results of the 2020 presidential election.”

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the majority leader, said that it was “unconscionable that a Trump Justice Department leader would conspire to subvert the people’s will.” He called on the department’s inspector general, Michael Horowitz, to investigate “this attempted sedition.”

Horowitz has already opened an investigation into whether Trump administration officials improperly pressured Byung J. Pak, who abruptly resigned this month as the U.S. attorney in Atlanta after being pressed to take actions related to the election, according to a person briefed on the inquiry. Durbin is investigating that matter as well.

Trump also tried to force Justice Department officials, including Rosen and the acting solicitor general, Jeffrey Wall, to file a lawsuit before the Supreme Court that would challenge Biden’s victory, according to a person briefed on the request.

One of Trump’s outside lawyers even drafted a brief for the department to file to the court. Department officials and the White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, told Trump that the plan would fail for several reasons, including the fact that the department did not have the grounds to challenge the outcome, the person said.

The fight between Trump and Justice Department officials over the Supreme Court filing was first reported by The Wall Street Journal.

The episode with Clark and Perry is yet another example at impeachment managers’ disposal as they put together their case that Trump should be disqualified from holding office again.

Clark declined to comment on his relationship with Perry, and he categorically denied devising any plan to oust Rosen. He said there had been “a candid discussion of options and pros and cons with the president” that had been inaccurately described by The Times, but he declined to provide details. He declined to say anything more about his conversations with Trump or Justice Department lawyers because of “the strictures of legal privilege.”

Asked whether his conversations with the president had violated the department policy governing contact with the president, he said that senior lawyers at the agency provided legal advice to the White House as part of their duties. “All my official communications were consistent with law,” he said.

Clark, a member of the conservative Federalist Society, had been appointed acting head of the civil division in September. He also oversaw the department’s environmental and natural resources division, where he had worked under President George W. Bush.

Neither Perry nor his top aides responded to repeated requests for comment.

Some Senate Republicans, including Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, have grown increasingly worried that if they do not intervene and distance themselves from Trump, the havoc wreaked by the former president could hurt Republicans’ political fortunes for years to come. The episode amounts to an unwelcome reminder that damaging information around his presidency could continue to emerge even though Trump is no longer in office.

And Perry’s role in the discussions could further escalate tensions in the House, where Democratic lawmakers were already livid at Republicans for fanning the flames before the Capitol riot, with some rank-and-file members calling for the expulsion of lawmakers who led efforts to overturn the election.

The pressure that Trump placed on the Justice Department, including any plan that he may have considered to remove Rosen, also raises legal questions for him. Trump’s duty as president was to ensure that “laws be faithfully executed for the benefit of the country,” and efforts to interfere in the election could be considered a violation of his constitutional duty, said Neil Eggleston, a partner at Kirkland &amp;amp; Ellis and a White House counsel under President Barack Obama.

There is little chance that a Justice Department letter sent to Georgia lawmakers would have prompted the state to invalidate its Electoral College votes. But the plan was consistent with the posture Perry had taken since November, when he began to falsely claim that there had been rampant fraud in the election, and throughout it all, Perry has remained defiant. Facing calls to resign over his role in the efforts to overturn the election, Perry issued a one-word response: “No.”

Perry, a retired brigadier general in the Pennsylvania Army National Guard and an Iraq War veteran, has been scrutinized for his openness to the conspiratorial. He baselessly suggested that the 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas by a lone gunman could have been influenced by “terrorist infiltration through the southern border” and refused to support a resolution that condemned QAnon, a pro-Trump conspiracy movement. ( Perry said he believed that the resolution infringed on individuals’ right to free speech and that he did not personally subscribe to the movement.)

An early supporter of the “Stop the Steal” campaign, Perry was one of 126 House Republicans who joined a legal brief in December supporting an extraordinary lawsuit seeking to overturn Biden’s victory. And he joined over two dozen of his colleagues who urged Trump to direct William Barr, the attorney general, to “investigate irregularities in the 2020 election.”

He objected on behalf of 79 other House Republicans to certifying Pennsylvania’s electoral results, and was among 139 House Republicans who voted to reject Biden’s electoral victory, even though he later acknowledged Biden as president-elect.

The plan that Perry devised with Clark set off a crisis at the Justice Department. When Clark approached Rosen with the Georgia letter at the end of December, Rosen refused to send it, according to four former administration officials. On Jan. 3, Clark notified Rosen that he would be taking his job at Trump’s behest.

As Rosen prepared to meet Trump later that day and fight for his job, his top deputies, including the acting deputy attorney general, Richard Donoghue, and his outgoing chief of staff, Patrick Hovakimian, convened the department’s senior leaders on a conference call, according to five former officials with knowledge of the call.

They told the department leaders that Rosen’s job was in jeopardy because of Clark’s machinations and said they would resign if Rosen was removed. They ended the call by asking their colleagues to privately consider what they would do if that happened. Over the next 15 minutes, all of them emailed or texted Hovakimian, saying that they would quit.

While Rosen, Donoghue and other top department and White House lawyers spent nearly three hours with Trump and Clark, debating the merits of sending the letter to Georgia lawmakers, Hovakimian drafted an email to the department’s senior leaders, including those who were not aware of what was transpiring at the White House, in anticipation of Rosen’s removal, according to two people briefed on the letter.

In it, he explained that Rosen had resisted Trump’s repeated calls to use the department’s law enforcement powers for improper ends and that the president had removed him, according to a person who reviewed the email. He wrote that he and Donoghue were resigning immediately and encouraged his colleagues to think hard about what they would do and to always act in the interests of the United States.

When Hovakimian received word that Rosen had been allowed to stay, he drafted a new email that he sent to the anxiously awaiting officials: Rosen and the cause of justice had won.

When Rep. Scott Perry joined his colleagues in a monthslong campaign to undermine the results of the presidential election, promoting “Stop the Steal” events and supporting an attempt to overturn millions of legally cast votes, he often took a back seat to higher-profile loyalists in President Donald Trump’s orbit.

When Rep. Scott Perry joined his colleagues in a monthslong campaign to undermine the results of the presidential election, promoting “Stop the Steal” events and supporting an attempt to overturn millions of legally cast votes, he often took a back seat to higher-profile loyalists in President Donald Trump’s orbit. But Perry, R-Pa., played a significant role in the crisis that played out at the top of the Justice Department this month, when Trump considered firing the acting attorney general and backed down only after top department officials threatened to resign en masse. It was Perry, an outspoken member of the hard-line Freedom Caucus, who first made Trump aware that a relatively obscure Justice Department official, Jeffrey Clark, acting chief of the civil division, was sympathetic to Trump’s view that the election had been stolen, according to former administration officials who spoke with Clark and Trump. Perry introduced the president to Clark, whose openness to conspiracy theories about election fraud presented Trump with a welcome change from the acting attorney general, Jeffrey Rosen, who stood by the results of the election and had repeatedly resisted the president’s efforts to undo them. Perry’s previously unreported role, and the quiet discussions between Trump and Clark that followed, underlined how much the former president was willing to use the government to subvert the election, turning to more junior and relatively unknown figures for help as ranking Republicans and Cabinet members rebuffed him. Perry’s involvement is also likely to heighten scrutiny of House Republicans who continue to advance Trump’s false and thoroughly debunked claims of election fraud, even after President Joe Biden’s inauguration this past week and as Congress prepares for an impeachment trial that will examine whether such talk incited the Capitol riot. It is unclear when Perry, who represents the Harrisburg area, met Clark, a Philadelphia native, or how well they knew each another before the introduction to Trump. Former Trump administration officials said it was only in late December that Clark told Rosen about the introduction brokered by Perry, who was among the scores of people feeding Trump false hope that he had won the election. But it is highly unlikely that Trump would have known Clark otherwise. Department officials were startled to learn that the president had called Clark directly on multiple occasions and that the two had met in person without alerting Rosen, those officials said. Justice Department policy stipulates that the president initially communicates with the attorney general or the deputy attorney general on all matters, and then a lower-level official if authorized. As the date for Congress to affirm Biden’s victory neared, Perry and Clark discussed a plan to have the Justice Department send a letter to Georgia state lawmakers informing them of an investigation into voter fraud that could invalidate the state’s Electoral College results. Former officials who were briefed on the plan said that the department’s dozens of voter fraud investigations nationwide had not turned up enough instances of fraud to alter the outcome of the election. Perry and Clark also discussed the plan with Trump, setting off a chain of events that nearly led to the ouster of Rosen, who had refused to send the letter. After The New York Times disclosed the details of the scheme Friday, the political fallout was swift. Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., incoming chairman of the Judiciary Committee, told the Justice Department in a letter Saturday that he would investigate efforts by Trump and Clark to use the agency “to further Trump’s efforts to subvert the results of the 2020 presidential election.” Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the majority leader, said that it was “unconscionable that a Trump Justice Department leader would conspire to subvert the people’s will.” He called on the department’s inspector general, Michael Horowitz, to investigate “this attempted sedition.” Horowitz has already opened an investigation into whether Trump administration officials improperly pressured Byung J. Pak, who abruptly resigned this month as the U.S. attorney in Atlanta after being pressed to take actions related to the election, according to a person briefed on the inquiry. Durbin is investigating that matter as well. Trump also tried to force Justice Department officials, including Rosen and the acting solicitor general, Jeffrey Wall, to file a lawsuit before the Supreme Court that would challenge Biden’s victory, according to a person briefed on the request. One of Trump’s outside lawyers even drafted a brief for the department to file to the court. Department officials and the White House counsel, Pat Cipollone, told Trump that the plan would fail for several reasons, including the fact that the department did not have the grounds to challenge the outcome, the person said. The fight between Trump and Justice Department officials over the Supreme Court filing was first reported by The Wall Street Journal. The episode with Clark and Perry is yet another example at impeachment managers’ disposal as they put together their case that Trump should be disqualified from holding office again. Clark declined to comment on his relationship with Perry, and he categorically denied devising any plan to oust Rosen. He said there had been “a candid discussion of options and pros and cons with the president” that had been inaccurately described by The Times, but he declined to provide details. He declined to say anything more about his conversations with Trump or Justice Department lawyers because of “the strictures of legal privilege.” Asked whether his conversations with the president had violated the department policy governing contact with the president, he said that senior lawyers at the agency provided legal advice to the White House as part of their duties. “All my official communications were consistent with law,” he said. Clark, a member of the conservative Federalist Society, had been appointed acting head of the civil division in September. He also oversaw the department’s environmental and natural resources division, where he had worked under President George W. Bush. Neither Perry nor his top aides responded to repeated requests for comment. Some Senate Republicans, including Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, have grown increasingly worried that if they do not intervene and distance themselves from Trump, the havoc wreaked by the former president could hurt Republicans’ political fortunes for years to come. The episode amounts to an unwelcome reminder that damaging information around his presidency could continue to emerge even though Trump is no longer in office. And Perry’s role in the discussions could further escalate tensions in the House, where Democratic lawmakers were already livid at Republicans for fanning the flames before the Capitol riot, with some rank-and-file members calling for the expulsion of lawmakers who led efforts to overturn the election. The pressure that Trump placed on the Justice Department, including any plan that he may have considered to remove Rosen, also raises legal questions for him. Trump’s duty as president was to ensure that “laws be faithfully executed for the benefit of the country,” and efforts to interfere in the election could be considered a violation of his constitutional duty, said Neil Eggleston, a partner at Kirkland &amp; Ellis and a White House counsel under President Barack Obama. There is little chance that a Justice Department letter sent to Georgia lawmakers would have prompted the state to invalidate its Electoral College votes. But the plan was consistent with the posture Perry had taken since November, when he began to falsely claim that there had been rampant fraud in the election, and throughout it all, Perry has remained defiant. Facing calls to resign over his role in the efforts to overturn the election, Perry issued a one-word response: “No.” Perry, a retired brigadier general in the Pennsylvania Army National Guard and an Iraq War veteran, has been scrutinized for his openness to the conspiratorial. He baselessly suggested that the 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas by a lone gunman could have been influenced by “terrorist infiltration through the southern border” and refused to support a resolution that condemned QAnon, a pro-Trump conspiracy movement. ( Perry said he believed that the resolution infringed on individuals’ right to free speech and that he did not personally subscribe to the movement.) An early supporter of the “Stop the Steal” campaign, Perry was one of 126 House Republicans who joined a legal brief in December supporting an extraordinary lawsuit seeking to overturn Biden’s victory. And he joined over two dozen of his colleagues who urged Trump to direct William Barr, the attorney general, to “investigate irregularities in the 2020 election.” He objected on behalf of 79 other House Republicans to certifying Pennsylvania’s electoral results, and was among 139 House Republicans who voted to reject Biden’s electoral victory, even though he later acknowledged Biden as president-elect. The plan that Perry devised with Clark set off a crisis at the Justice Department. When Clark approached Rosen with the Georgia letter at the end of December, Rosen refused to send it, according to four former administration officials. On Jan. 3, Clark notified Rosen that he would be taking his job at Trump’s behest. As Rosen prepared to meet Trump later that day and fight for his job, his top deputies, including the acting deputy attorney general, Richard Donoghue, and his outgoing chief of staff, Patrick Hovakimian, convened the department’s senior leaders on a conference call, according to five former officials with knowledge of the call. They told the department leaders that Rosen’s job was in jeopardy because of Clark’s machinations and said they would resign if Rosen was removed. They ended the call by asking their colleagues to privately consider what they would do if that happened. Over the next 15 minutes, all of them emailed or texted Hovakimian, saying that they would quit. While Rosen, Donoghue and other top department and White House lawyers spent nearly three hours with Trump and Clark, debating the merits of sending the letter to Georgia lawmakers, Hovakimian drafted an email to the department’s senior leaders, including those who were not aware of what was transpiring at the White House, in anticipation of Rosen’s removal, according to two people briefed on the letter. In it, he explained that Rosen had resisted Trump’s repeated calls to use the department’s law enforcement powers for improper ends and that the president had removed him, according to a person who reviewed the email. He wrote that he and Donoghue were resigning immediately and encouraged his colleagues to think hard about what they would do and to always act in the interests of the United States. When Hovakimian received word that Rosen had been allowed to stay, he drafted a new email that he sent to the anxiously awaiting officials: Rosen and the cause of justice had won.

Pennsylvania lawmaker was key to Justice Dept scheme

Darrell Frazier believed he had found a path out of his life sentence in federal prison, with a president whose allies had advocated a broad use of pardons and a new clemency initiative. Frazier thought he seemed like a perfect candidate.

But when Barack Obama left office in 2017 having pardoned or commuted the sentences of more people than any other president, Frazier was not among them. The Justice Department had denied his application for clemency.

So when Obama’s successor, Donald Trump, took office, Frazier resolved to try a different path. Instead of only going through the formal channels, he also tried to get the attention of people with direct access to Trump.

After years of writing letters to celebrities, activist organizations and even Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, Frazier got his break. An activist who had worked with the administration took Frazier’s case directly to Trump’s daughter Ivanka, who had been taking pardon requests to her father in his final days in office. And early Wednesday, Trump’s last day as president, Frazier’s counselor came to his cell to deliver the news: He had been pardoned and would soon be released.

Tears started to flow.

“It just blew me away,” said Frazier, 60, who had served 32 years of a life sentence after being convicted of a conspiracy to sell cocaine.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-ex-president-trumps-impeachment-trial-postponed-to-february-358759/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

While Trump was heavily criticized for issuing dozens of pardons to political allies and friends, there also were numerous cases that won the praise of activists for providing relief to people serving harsh sentences for relatively minor, nonviolent offenses.

Frazier’s case in many ways epitomized Trump’s mixed record on criminal justice. On the one hand, he did support some bipartisan reforms to reduce the prison population. On the other, the pardon process showed Trump’s ad hoc, somewhat capricious approach to justice, one that often required special access and was motivated by optics and political expediency during an election where he set out to target more Black voters, some activists said.

“Trump did nothing to actually address the racist practices of the prison industrial complex,” said Thenjiwe McHarris, a member of the leadership team for the Movement for Black Lives. “While we support those he pardoned, we just also want to acknowledge that it was done as a spectacle — an attempt to paint him as a savior while not actually addressing the harms of the actual system.”

The pardon process, and criminal justice reform more broadly, will be among the areas in which President Joe Biden is most closely scrutinized because of his previous record of promoting tough-on-crime policies. He was an architect of the 1994 crime bill, legislation that has since been criticized across the political spectrum for leading to overpopulated prisons and the devastation of Black families.

Although Biden has apologized for his past actions on criminal justice, activists say he will have to prove his sincerity.

“I think that for me the jury is still out,” said Syrita Steib, who was among those to receive a pardon from Trump on his final day and runs an organization that helps women who are currently and formerly incarcerated.

She added that Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took actions that helped to create the punitive justice system of today. “It’s my hope that this administration will begin to right the wrongs that they created years ago,” she said.

During the campaign, Biden promised to use his clemency power “broadly” to secure the release of individuals facing unduly long sentences for certain nonviolent and drug crimes. He said he would build on the legacy of Obama, under whom he served as vice president.

A White House spokesperson Friday declined to comment on the president’s plans.

Part of the challenge will be reforming a clemency system that many view as arcane and unfair.

The pardon attorney’s office, operating out of the Justice Department, is responsible for reviewing the petitions for pardons and sentence commutations and making recommendations for clemency to the president. That system has left thousands of petitions waiting for review with a small team of lawyers unable to keep up.

In the past, some advocates have argued that the pardon office should operate out of the White House. In an informal way, that is what Trump did in an operation that reflected the personal interests of his family members and appealed to Trump as an issue that he believed would please Black voters.

Jessica Jackson, a lawyer who advocated for clemencies during the Obama and Trump administrations, said pardons should be run by an independent office. It was a conflict of interest for the Justice Department to both prosecute cases and decide who gets pardoned, said Jackson, who brought Frazier’s case to Ivanka Trump.

There needed to be a systemic mechanism for granting clemencies so that they occur more frequently, she said, rather than presidents jamming them through before leaving office. Jackson said she felt there would be a real openness on the part of the incoming administration to reforming the pardon process and the criminal justice system more broadly.

“He’s looking for issues where he can find common ground on both sides of the aisle,” Jackson said of Biden. “I think this issue naturally presents itself.”

What that reform looks like, though, will be hotly debated and scrutinized in the months and years ahead.

Trump’s most notable legislation on criminal justice reform was the First Step Act, but even that was criticized by many activists as being far too modest to effect real change. Still, those intimately involved with Trump’s pardon process seemed unwilling to let his tough-on-crime approach — he oversaw more federal executions than any president in more than 120 years — derail the work on clemencies.

This week’s pardons included Chalana McFarland, who was sentenced in 2005 to 30 years for multiple counts of mortgage fraud, and Michael Pelletier, who was serving a life sentence in federal prison for a nonviolent marijuana conspiracy offense. But he also pardoned Al Pirro, the ex-husband of one of his favorite Fox News hosts, Jeanine Pirro; Steve Bannon, his former chief strategist; and Elliott Broidy, one of his top fundraisers in 2016.

Alice Johnson, a onetime drug convict, had served 22 years of a life sentence when her case caught the eyes of Trump because Kim Kardashian had brought it to his attention. Trump commuted her sentence in 2018 and then pardoned her after she praised him at the Republican National Convention in 2020.

Her path to the Trump White House had given her what she saw as a unique opportunity to make a difference, and she became a key part of the informal clemency process. The president personally asked her to help him find other people with stories like her own, she said.

“I took him up on it and stayed on top of them,” Johnson said. “There was no way I was going to let that opportunity pass.”

Working mostly with Kushner and, in the final days of the administration, Ivanka Trump, Johnson provided long lists of strong cases to the White House. Kushner and Ivanka Trump would select stories that resonated with them, and then take those cases to the White House Counsel’s Office and the Justice Department for vetting, before making their cases directly to the president.

Frazier said he felt he had a pretty good chance of getting on Trump’s radar more than a year ago when CAN-DO Justice Through Clemency, an organization that advocates for incarcerated nonviolent offenders, took his case. The organization had won other pardons.

But one thing that really made him think Trump would consider his case was when he heard the former president describing his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, as a rat for talking to prosecutors.

It made him think that Trump could empathize with people like him — Frazier’s ultimate downfall was someone from the drug operation testifying against him, he said. So when he heard about the comment, he said he turned to a fellow inmate and told him: “The president’s going to get me out. He sounds like us in here.”

Darrell Frazier believed he had found a path out of his life sentence in federal prison, with a president whose allies had advocated a broad use of pardons and a new clemency initiative.

Darrell Frazier believed he had found a path out of his life sentence in federal prison, with a president whose allies had advocated a broad use of pardons and a new clemency initiative. Frazier thought he seemed like a perfect candidate. But when Barack Obama left office in 2017 having pardoned or commuted the sentences of more people than any other president, Frazier was not among them. The Justice Department had denied his application for clemency. So when Obama’s successor, Donald Trump, took office, Frazier resolved to try a different path. Instead of only going through the formal channels, he also tried to get the attention of people with direct access to Trump. After years of writing letters to celebrities, activist organizations and even Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, Frazier got his break. An activist who had worked with the administration took Frazier’s case directly to Trump’s daughter Ivanka, who had been taking pardon requests to her father in his final days in office. And early Wednesday, Trump’s last day as president, Frazier’s counselor came to his cell to deliver the news: He had been pardoned and would soon be released. Tears started to flow. “It just blew me away,” said Frazier, 60, who had served 32 years of a life sentence after being convicted of a conspiracy to sell cocaine. × While Trump was heavily criticized for issuing dozens of pardons to political allies and friends, there also were numerous cases that won the praise of activists for providing relief to people serving harsh sentences for relatively minor, nonviolent offenses. Frazier’s case in many ways epitomized Trump’s mixed record on criminal justice. On the one hand, he did support some bipartisan reforms to reduce the prison population. On the other, the pardon process showed Trump’s ad hoc, somewhat capricious approach to justice, one that often required special access and was motivated by optics and political expediency during an election where he set out to target more Black voters, some activists said. “Trump did nothing to actually address the racist practices of the prison industrial complex,” said Thenjiwe McHarris, a member of the leadership team for the Movement for Black Lives. “While we support those he pardoned, we just also want to acknowledge that it was done as a spectacle — an attempt to paint him as a savior while not actually addressing the harms of the actual system.” The pardon process, and criminal justice reform more broadly, will be among the areas in which President Joe Biden is most closely scrutinized because of his previous record of promoting tough-on-crime policies. He was an architect of the 1994 crime bill, legislation that has since been criticized across the political spectrum for leading to overpopulated prisons and the devastation of Black families. Although Biden has apologized for his past actions on criminal justice, activists say he will have to prove his sincerity. “I think that for me the jury is still out,” said Syrita Steib, who was among those to receive a pardon from Trump on his final day and runs an organization that helps women who are currently and formerly incarcerated. She added that Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris took actions that helped to create the punitive justice system of today. “It’s my hope that this administration will begin to right the wrongs that they created years ago,” she said. During the campaign, Biden promised to use his clemency power “broadly” to secure the release of individuals facing unduly long sentences for certain nonviolent and drug crimes. He said he would build on the legacy of Obama, under whom he served as vice president. A White House spokesperson Friday declined to comment on the president’s plans. Part of the challenge will be reforming a clemency system that many view as arcane and unfair. The pardon attorney’s office, operating out of the Justice Department, is responsible for reviewing the petitions for pardons and sentence commutations and making recommendations for clemency to the president. That system has left thousands of petitions waiting for review with a small team of lawyers unable to keep up. In the past, some advocates have argued that the pardon office should operate out of the White House. In an informal way, that is what Trump did in an operation that reflected the personal interests of his family members and appealed to Trump as an issue that he believed would please Black voters. Jessica Jackson, a lawyer who advocated for clemencies during the Obama and Trump administrations, said pardons should be run by an independent office. It was a conflict of interest for the Justice Department to both prosecute cases and decide who gets pardoned, said Jackson, who brought Frazier’s case to Ivanka Trump. There needed to be a systemic mechanism for granting clemencies so that they occur more frequently, she said, rather than presidents jamming them through before leaving office. Jackson said she felt there would be a real openness on the part of the incoming administration to reforming the pardon process and the criminal justice system more broadly. “He’s looking for issues where he can find common ground on both sides of the aisle,” Jackson said of Biden. “I think this issue naturally presents itself.” What that reform looks like, though, will be hotly debated and scrutinized in the months and years ahead. Trump’s most notable legislation on criminal justice reform was the First Step Act, but even that was criticized by many activists as being far too modest to effect real change. Still, those intimately involved with Trump’s pardon process seemed unwilling to let his tough-on-crime approach — he oversaw more federal executions than any president in more than 120 years — derail the work on clemencies. This week’s pardons included Chalana McFarland, who was sentenced in 2005 to 30 years for multiple counts of mortgage fraud, and Michael Pelletier, who was serving a life sentence in federal prison for a nonviolent marijuana conspiracy offense. But he also pardoned Al Pirro, the ex-husband of one of his favorite Fox News hosts, Jeanine Pirro; Steve Bannon, his former chief strategist; and Elliott Broidy, one of his top fundraisers in 2016. Alice Johnson, a onetime drug convict, had served 22 years of a life sentence when her case caught the eyes of Trump because Kim Kardashian had brought it to his attention. Trump commuted her sentence in 2018 and then pardoned her after she praised him at the Republican National Convention in 2020. Her path to the Trump White House had given her what she saw as a unique opportunity to make a difference, and she became a key part of the informal clemency process. The president personally asked her to help him find other people with stories like her own, she said. “I took him up on it and stayed on top of them,” Johnson said. “There was no way I was going to let that opportunity pass.” Working mostly with Kushner and, in the final days of the administration, Ivanka Trump, Johnson provided long lists of strong cases to the White House. Kushner and Ivanka Trump would select stories that resonated with them, and then take those cases to the White House Counsel’s Office and the Justice Department for vetting, before making their cases directly to the president. Frazier said he felt he had a pretty good chance of getting on Trump’s radar more than a year ago when CAN-DO Justice Through Clemency, an organization that advocates for incarcerated nonviolent offenders, took his case. The organization had won other pardons. But one thing that really made him think Trump would consider his case was when he heard the former president describing his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, as a rat for talking to prosecutors. It made him think that Trump could empathize with people like him — Frazier’s ultimate downfall was someone from the drug operation testifying against him, he said. So when he heard about the comment, he said he turned to a fellow inmate and told him: “The president’s going to get me out. He sounds like us in here.”

Trump’s pardon process was a mix of mercy and favoritism

Donald Trump has been called by many to be someone with chronic case of denial. Even when US Election was called in favour of Joe Biden, Trump continued claiming that he was the winner. Now that he is gone, it's perhaps more than expected that Trump's supporters would whip something truly original to continue claiming that he is the real president of the US.

This has happened and fun fact is that the litigants have taken support from Lord Of The Rings (LOTR) to drive home their point.

So here's the deal, in LOTR, the Kingdom of Gondor had an empty throne, its king was exiled and the kingdom was ruled by a Steward, a temporary ruler. He was to rule till the rightful king returned.

So a lawsuit in Texas equates USA to Kingdom of Gondor. USA hasn't had a 'king' or anyone like that since 1776.

“This analogy is applicable since there is now in Washington DC a group of individuals calling themselves the president, vice-president and Congress who have no rightful claim to govern the American people,” the litigants state as per The Guardian.

“Since only the rightful king could sit on the throne of Gondor, a steward was appointed to manage Gondor until the return of the King, known as ‘Aragorn’, occurred at the end of the story.” they add.

Aragorn is the rightful king in LOTR. The character was played by Viggo Mortensen.

As it is apparent, President Joe Biden is like the Steward of Gondor, fit to rule only for a short time till the 'rightful king' (read Donald Trump) returns.

The litigants probably need a standing ovation for their courage for two thing

1. Continuing their journey through wonderland to still strongly believe that the election was rigged. This when even US Supreme Court trashed previous such litigation

2. Taking help of a fantasy kingdom to prove their point. Imagine the plight of their lawyer while arguing the case in a courtroom which only has place for cold hard facts and logic.

Aftereffects of four years of Trump-rule? Who knows.

Donald Trump has been called by many to be someone with chronic case of denial. Even when US Election was called in favour of Joe Biden, Trump continued claiming that he was the winner.

Donald Trump has been called by many to be someone with chronic case of denial. Even when US Election was called in favour of Joe Biden, Trump continued claiming that he was the winner. Now that he is gone, it's perhaps more than expected that Trump's supporters would whip something truly original to continue claiming that he is the real president of the US. This has happened and fun fact is that the litigants have taken support from Lord Of The Rings (LOTR) to drive home their point. So here's the deal, in LOTR, the Kingdom of Gondor had an empty throne, its king was exiled and the kingdom was ruled by a Steward, a temporary ruler. He was to rule till the rightful king returned. So a lawsuit in Texas equates USA to Kingdom of Gondor. USA hasn't had a 'king' or anyone like that since 1776. “This analogy is applicable since there is now in Washington DC a group of individuals calling themselves the president, vice-president and Congress who have no rightful claim to govern the American people,” the litigants state as per The Guardian. “Since only the rightful king could sit on the throne of Gondor, a steward was appointed to manage Gondor until the return of the King, known as ‘Aragorn’, occurred at the end of the story.” they add. Aragorn is the rightful king in LOTR. The character was played by Viggo Mortensen. As it is apparent, President Joe Biden is like the Steward of Gondor, fit to rule only for a short time till the 'rightful king' (read Donald Trump) returns. The litigants probably need a standing ovation for their courage for two thing 1. Continuing their journey through wonderland to still strongly believe that the election was rigged. This when even US Supreme Court trashed previous such litigation 2. Taking help of a fantasy kingdom to prove their point. Imagine the plight of their lawyer while arguing the case in a courtroom which only has place for cold hard facts and logic. Aftereffects of four years of Trump-rule? Who knows.

Pro-Trump lawsuit takes help of Lord of The Rings to make case stronger

Long before he won US Election 2020, Joe Biden had promised that if he gets elected, he will build a team that 'looks like America'; diverse, inclusive and young. Team Biden will indeed be diverse. The choices of people in this team represent diversity of ideology, background, race and religion.

61 per cent of the White House appointees are women. 54 per cent are people or colour. 11 per cent are of LGBTQ community. 20 per cent of the appointee are first-generation Americans. And 40% per cent of them have children at home.

What about the cabinet picks? It's a motley crew again. Moreover, many of the nominees will be pioneers in their roles. People who have broken barriers and shattered glass ceilings with their appointments.

In Biden administration, there will be many firsts.

First woman to lead national intelligence.

First black defence secretary.

First Latino health secretary.

First Native American cabinet secretary.

First Latino head of homeland security.

Youngest secretary of state in decades.

And the first openly-gay man confirmed to a cabinet role in American history!

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/families-cheer-the-biden-harris-colorful-white-house-358338/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Joe Biden plans to use America's diversity as an essential strength in his cabinet. At Department of Justice, judge Merrick Garland has been nominated to serve as America's next attorney-general. He is a 68-year-old centrist. This is Garland's third nomination to the US Supreme Court.

At Department of Commerce, Gina Raimondo Has been nominated as commerce secretary. If confirmed she will be the fourth woman to hold this position. At Department of Education Miguel Cardona has been nominated as the head. He is currently the commissioner of education in Connecticut. If confirmed, Cardona will be the second Puerto Rican and the 3rd Latino secretary of education.

At Department of Interior, US Representative from New Mexico. Deb Haaland has been nominated for the position of interior secretary. If confirmed, 60-year-old Haaland will be the first Native American to become a cabinet secretary. He is a rising star in the Democratic Party and a familiar name among millennials.

Pete Buttigieg has been nominated as transportation secretary. If confirmed, the 39-year-old will be the first LGBTQ person to hold a cabinet post in America

Next, in Department of Energy, former Michigan Mayor Jennifer Granholm has been appointed as secretary of energy. She is a strong advocate for zero-emission vehicles. 61-year-old Granholm will only be the second woman to serve as secretary of energy.

Janet Yellen has been appointed as Treasury Secretary. She will be the first woman ever to hold this post. Yellen was also the first woman to chair US Federal Reserve in Obama era.

Another important and unprecedented nomination is of Llyod Austin who is a retired four-star army general. He has been nominated to head the department of defence. If confirmed, Llyod Austin will be the first black defence secretary, the first black chief of Pentagon in American history.

Xavier Becerra has been nominated to steer the Department of Health &amp; Human Services. If confirmed, The 62-year-old will be the first Latino to head the department

At the Office of Management &amp; Budget Neera Tanden has been nominated to serve as the director. If her name is confirmed, she will be the first woman of colour and the first South Asian-American to lead this office.

Alejandro Myorkas has been nominated to head the Department of Homeland Security.

If confirmed, he will be the first Latino-American and the first immigrant to lead this agency. This is the agency that is in-charge of implementing America's immigration policies and border laws.

Looking after national intelligence will be Avril Haines. She has been nominated as director of intelligence. Once her name is confirmed, she will be the first woman to lead America's intel community.

And working in tandem with her will be Jake Sullivan. He has been appointed as the National Security Adviser. At age 43, Sullivan will be the youngest person to hold the position since the Eisenhower administration.

Linda Thomas-Greenfield has been nominated as US Ambassador to United Nations. If confirmed, she would be only the second black woman to hold the post.

And lastly the Department of State.

Replacing the dynamic Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State will be Antony Blinken. As the country's top diplomat, Blinken will play a pivotal role in rebuilding America's alliances like re-entering agreements with Iran, and to halt his country's exit from the World Health Organisation (WHO).

Confirmation of these names is a given since Democrats have won control of US Senate too. So once these appointments are made, the Biden-Harris administration will be the most diverse in American history.

Long before he won US Election 2020, Joe Biden had promised that if he gets elected, he will build a team that 'looks like America'; diverse, inclusive and young.

Long before he won US Election 2020, Joe Biden had promised that if he gets elected, he will build a team that 'looks like America'; diverse, inclusive and young. Team Biden will indeed be diverse. The choices of people in this team represent diversity of ideology, background, race and religion. 61 per cent of the White House appointees are women. 54 per cent are people or colour. 11 per cent are of LGBTQ community. 20 per cent of the appointee are first-generation Americans. And 40% per cent of them have children at home. What about the cabinet picks? It's a motley crew again. Moreover, many of the nominees will be pioneers in their roles. People who have broken barriers and shattered glass ceilings with their appointments. In Biden administration, there will be many firsts. First woman to lead national intelligence. First black defence secretary. First Latino health secretary. First Native American cabinet secretary. First Latino head of homeland security. Youngest secretary of state in decades. And the first openly-gay man confirmed to a cabinet role in American history! × Joe Biden plans to use America's diversity as an essential strength in his cabinet. At Department of Justice, judge Merrick Garland has been nominated to serve as America's next attorney-general. He is a 68-year-old centrist. This is Garland's third nomination to the US Supreme Court. At Department of Commerce, Gina Raimondo Has been nominated as commerce secretary. If confirmed she will be the fourth woman to hold this position. At Department of Education Miguel Cardona has been nominated as the head. He is currently the commissioner of education in Connecticut. If confirmed, Cardona will be the second Puerto Rican and the 3rd Latino secretary of education. At Department of Interior, US Representative from New Mexico. Deb Haaland has been nominated for the position of interior secretary. If confirmed, 60-year-old Haaland will be the first Native American to become a cabinet secretary. He is a rising star in the Democratic Party and a familiar name among millennials. Pete Buttigieg has been nominated as transportation secretary. If confirmed, the 39-year-old will be the first LGBTQ person to hold a cabinet post in America Next, in Department of Energy, former Michigan Mayor Jennifer Granholm has been appointed as secretary of energy. She is a strong advocate for zero-emission vehicles. 61-year-old Granholm will only be the second woman to serve as secretary of energy. Janet Yellen has been appointed as Treasury Secretary. She will be the first woman ever to hold this post. Yellen was also the first woman to chair US Federal Reserve in Obama era. Another important and unprecedented nomination is of Llyod Austin who is a retired four-star army general. He has been nominated to head the department of defence. If confirmed, Llyod Austin will be the first black defence secretary, the first black chief of Pentagon in American history. Xavier Becerra has been nominated to steer the Department of Health & Human Services. If confirmed, The 62-year-old will be the first Latino to head the department At the Office of Management & Budget Neera Tanden has been nominated to serve as the director. If her name is confirmed, she will be the first woman of colour and the first South Asian-American to lead this office. Alejandro Myorkas has been nominated to head the Department of Homeland Security. If confirmed, he will be the first Latino-American and the first immigrant to lead this agency. This is the agency that is in-charge of implementing America's immigration policies and border laws. Looking after national intelligence will be Avril Haines. She has been nominated as director of intelligence. Once her name is confirmed, she will be the first woman to lead America's intel community. And working in tandem with her will be Jake Sullivan. He has been appointed as the National Security Adviser. At age 43, Sullivan will be the youngest person to hold the position since the Eisenhower administration. Linda Thomas-Greenfield has been nominated as US Ambassador to United Nations. If confirmed, she would be only the second black woman to hold the post. And lastly the Department of State. Replacing the dynamic Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State will be Antony Blinken. As the country's top diplomat, Blinken will play a pivotal role in rebuilding America's alliances like re-entering agreements with Iran, and to halt his country's exit from the World Health Organisation (WHO). Confirmation of these names is a given since Democrats have won control of US Senate too. So once these appointments are made, the Biden-Harris administration will be the most diverse in American history.

Joe Biden to have the most diverse administration in US history

US Vice President-elect Kamala Harris has already won hearts by rising to heights no woman previously could in US politics. But Thursday was another reminder for everyone of her grounded nature. Kamala Harris paid a heartfelt tribute to her mother by posting her childhood pics on Instagram.

"My parents were born half a world apart from each other: my mother in India and my dad in Jamaica. But like so many others, they came to America in pursuit of a dream. And that dream was a dream for themselves, for me, and for my sister Maya..." begins the post. The picture shows her mother Shyamala Gopalan Harris feeding milk to an infant Kamala Harris. Shyamala Gopalan Harris was a scientist at University of California, Berkley.

"... She was all of five feet, but if you ever met her you would think she was seven feet tall. It’s because of her that I was raised in a community where we were taught to see a world beyond just ourselves. To be conscious and compassionate about the struggles of all people..." reads the post further. The second photo shows a collage of pictures of Kamala Harris and her sister Maya.

"...My mother always used to say, “don’t sit around and complain about things, do something.” I’ve tried to follow that advice every day and live by the example she set..." says the post.

The third image shows Kamala Harris' mother walking her two children on road. Kamala Harris's post ends with her saying that she would be sharing people, places, and moments that have had an influence on her life in the next week.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="instagram-media" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/p/CJ_acgLlJxQ/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="13" style=" background:#FFF; border:0; border-radius:3px; box-shadow:0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width:540px; min-width:326px; padding:0; width:99.375%; width:-webkit-calc(100% - 2px); width:calc(100% - 2px);">
<div style="padding:16px;">
<div style=" display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;">
<div style="background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;">
<div style=" background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style=" background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;">&nbsp;</div>
</div>
</div>

<div style="padding: 19% 0;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="display:block; height:50px; margin:0 auto 12px; width:50px;"><a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CJ_acgLlJxQ/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" style=" background:#FFFFFF; line-height:0; padding:0 0; text-align:center; text-decoration:none; width:100%;" target="_blank"><svg height="50px" version="1.1" viewbox="0 0 60 60" width="50px" xmlns="https://www.w3.org/2000/svg" xmlns:xlink="https://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><g fill="none" fill-rule="evenodd" stroke="none" stroke-width="1"><g fill="#000000" transform="translate(-511.000000, -20.000000)"><g><path d="M556.869,30.41 C554.814,30.41 553.148,32.076 553.148,34.131 C553.148,36.186 554.814,37.852 556.869,37.852 C558.924,37.852 560.59,36.186 560.59,34.131 C560.59,32.076 558.924,30.41 556.869,30.41 M541,60.657 C535.114,60.657 530.342,55.887 530.342,50 C530.342,44.114 535.114,39.342 541,39.342 C546.887,39.342 551.658,44.114 551.658,50 C551.658,55.887 546.887,60.657 541,60.657 M541,33.886 C532.1,33.886 524.886,41.1 524.886,50 C524.886,58.899 532.1,66.113 541,66.113 C549.9,66.113 557.115,58.899 557.115,50 C557.115,41.1 549.9,33.886 541,33.886 M565.378,62.101 C565.244,65.022 564.756,66.606 564.346,67.663 C563.803,69.06 563.154,70.057 562.106,71.106 C561.058,72.155 560.06,72.803 558.662,73.347 C557.607,73.757 556.021,74.244 553.102,74.378 C549.944,74.521 548.997,74.552 541,74.552 C533.003,74.552 532.056,74.521 528.898,74.378 C525.979,74.244 524.393,73.757 523.338,73.347 C521.94,72.803 520.942,72.155 519.894,71.106 C518.846,70.057 518.197,69.06 517.654,67.663 C517.244,66.606 516.755,65.022 516.623,62.101 C516.479,58.943 516.448,57.996 516.448,50 C516.448,42.003 516.479,41.056 516.623,37.899 C516.755,34.978 517.244,33.391 517.654,32.338 C518.197,30.938 518.846,29.942 519.894,28.894 C520.942,27.846 521.94,27.196 523.338,26.654 C524.393,26.244 525.979,25.756 528.898,25.623 C532.057,25.479 533.004,25.448 541,25.448 C548.997,25.448 549.943,25.479 553.102,25.623 C556.021,25.756 557.607,26.244 558.662,26.654 C560.06,27.196 561.058,27.846 562.106,28.894 C563.154,29.942 563.803,30.938 564.346,32.338 C564.756,33.391 565.244,34.978 565.378,37.899 C565.522,41.056 565.552,42.003 565.552,50 C565.552,57.996 565.522,58.943 565.378,62.101 M570.82,37.631 C570.674,34.438 570.167,32.258 569.425,30.349 C568.659,28.377 567.633,26.702 565.965,25.035 C564.297,23.368 562.623,22.342 560.652,21.575 C558.743,20.834 556.562,20.326 553.369,20.18 C550.169,20.033 549.148,20 541,20 C532.853,20 531.831,20.033 528.631,20.18 C525.438,20.326 523.257,20.834 521.349,21.575 C519.376,22.342 517.703,23.368 516.035,25.035 C514.368,26.702 513.342,28.377 512.574,30.349 C511.834,32.258 511.326,34.438 511.181,37.631 C511.035,40.831 511,41.851 511,50 C511,58.147 511.035,59.17 511.181,62.369 C511.326,65.562 511.834,67.743 512.574,69.651 C513.342,71.625 514.368,73.296 516.035,74.965 C517.703,76.634 519.376,77.658 521.349,78.425 C523.257,79.167 525.438,79.673 528.631,79.82 C531.831,79.965 532.853,80.001 541,80.001 C549.148,80.001 550.169,79.965 553.369,79.82 C556.562,79.673 558.743,79.167 560.652,78.425 C562.623,77.658 564.297,76.634 565.965,74.965 C567.633,73.296 568.659,71.625 569.425,69.651 C570.167,67.743 570.674,65.562 570.82,62.369 C570.966,59.17 571,58.147 571,50 C571,41.851 570.966,40.831 570.82,37.631"></path></g></g></g></svg></a></div>

<div style="padding-top: 8px;">
<div style=" color:#3897f0; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; font-style:normal; font-weight:550; line-height:18px;"><a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CJ_acgLlJxQ/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" style=" background:#FFFFFF; line-height:0; padding:0 0; text-align:center; text-decoration:none; width:100%;" target="_blank">View this post on Instagram</a></div>
</div>

<div style="padding: 12.5% 0;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;">
<div>
<div style="background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="background-color: #F4F4F4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style="background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);">&nbsp;</div>
</div>

<div style="margin-left: 8px;">
<div style=" background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style=" width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg)">&nbsp;</div>
</div>

<div style="margin-left: auto;">
<div style=" width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);">&nbsp;</div>

<div style=" background-color: #F4F4F4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);">&nbsp;</div>

<div style=" width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);">&nbsp;</div>
</div>
</div>

<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<div style=" background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;">&nbsp;</div>

<div style=" background-color: #F4F4F4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;">&nbsp;</div>
</div>

<p style=" color:#c9c8cd; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; line-height:17px; margin-bottom:0; margin-top:8px; overflow:hidden; padding:8px 0 7px; text-align:center; text-overflow:ellipsis; white-space:nowrap;"><a href="https://www.instagram.com/p/CJ_acgLlJxQ/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" style=" color:#c9c8cd; font-family:Arial,sans-serif; font-size:14px; font-style:normal; font-weight:normal; line-height:17px; text-decoration:none;" target="_blank">A post shared by Kamala Harris (@kamalaharris)</a>
</div>
</blockquote>
<script async src="//www.instagram.com/embed.js"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

Kamala Harris will assume the post of Vice-President of the USA on January 20 when she and US President-elect Joe Biden are inaugurated. 
&nbsp;

US Vice President-elect Kamala Harris has already won hearts by rising to heights no woman previously could in US politics. But Thursday was another reminder for everyone of her grounded nature.

US Vice President-elect Kamala Harris has already won hearts by rising to heights no woman previously could in US politics. But Thursday was another reminder for everyone of her grounded nature. Kamala Harris paid a heartfelt tribute to her mother by posting her childhood pics on Instagram. "My parents were born half a world apart from each other: my mother in India and my dad in Jamaica. But like so many others, they came to America in pursuit of a dream. And that dream was a dream for themselves, for me, and for my sister Maya..." begins the post. The picture shows her mother Shyamala Gopalan Harris feeding milk to an infant Kamala Harris. Shyamala Gopalan Harris was a scientist at University of California, Berkley. "... She was all of five feet, but if you ever met her you would think she was seven feet tall. It’s because of her that I was raised in a community where we were taught to see a world beyond just ourselves. To be conscious and compassionate about the struggles of all people..." reads the post further. The second photo shows a collage of pictures of Kamala Harris and her sister Maya. "...My mother always used to say, “don’t sit around and complain about things, do something.” I’ve tried to follow that advice every day and live by the example she set..." says the post. The third image shows Kamala Harris' mother walking her two children on road. Kamala Harris's post ends with her saying that she would be sharing people, places, and moments that have had an influence on her life in the next week. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Kamala Harris (@kamalaharris) × Kamala Harris will assume the post of Vice-President of the USA on January 20 when she and US President-elect Joe Biden are inaugurated.

Kamala Harris shares childhood pics on Instagram, pays tribute to mother

President-elect Joe Biden’s choice for Treasury secretary, Janet L. Yellen, collected more than $7 million in speaking fees over the past two years from major corporations and Wall Street banks that have a keen interest in the financial policies she will oversee after her expected confirmation to lead the Treasury Department.

Yellen’s paid speaking appearances — which included $992,000 from investment bank Citi for nine appearances — were among the lucrative payments from a range of Wall Street, Big Tech and corporate interests to three prominent prospective members of the incoming Biden administration.

The payments, revealed in disclosure statements covering the previous two years and released on New Year’s Eve, have caused consternation among progressive activists concerned about the influence of special interests around Biden, who they see as part of a Democratic establishment that has not sufficiently embraced liberal priorities.

Biden’s choice for secretary of state, Antony J. Blinken, was paid nearly $1.2 million by a consulting firm he helped found, WestExec Advisors, where he advised a range of corporations including Facebook, Boeing, private equity giant Blackstone and asset management company Lazard.

Biden’s choice for director of national intelligence, Avril Haines, was paid $180,000 to consult for data-mining company Palantir, which has raised liberal hackles for providing data and surveillance services to law enforcement, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Along with their disclosure statements, Yellen, Blinken and Haines each filed ethics agreements pledging to avoid involvement in specific matters that could affect any holding they still own, or with which they had worked in the past year, unless they receive a written waiver from ethics officials.

The three may have to extend the conflict of interest window beyond a year if Biden enacts an expected ethics policy barring officials in his administration from participating for two years in policies that could affect their former business interests.

Yellen and Blinken also indicated they would divest their interests in companies, including stock owned by Yellen in major corporations such as AT&amp;amp;T, ConocoPhillips, Dow, Pfizer and Raytheon. Blinken said he would sell his stake in WestExec Advisors as well as a venture capital firm linked to it.

Blinken indicated in his disclosure filing that those stakes are worth a total of $1.5 million to $6 million.

David Segal, the executive director of the progressive group Demand Progress, said that he still had concerns even though the officials had pledged to abide by conflict of interest rules.

“There are almost too many corporate clients to count who have relationships to the respective ambits these designees would steward if confirmed,” he said, adding that “this is an unfortunate circumstance,” particularly as Biden strives to strike a difference between his administration and President Donald Trump’s.

In the Trump administration, representatives from corporate America and Wall Street held prominent posts, and conflicts of interest abounded.

The filings by Biden’s team offer another glimpse of Washington’s longtime revolving door. Officials whose parties have lost power monetize their insider expertise and connections in the private sector, then head back into government when their party retakes the White House.

Yellen, a former Federal Reserve chair, started giving paid speeches in February 2018, which was within a year of the conclusion of her term at the Fed. She was also a consultant to Magellan Financial Group Ltd., an Australia-based investment fund manager, which paid her $125,000.

Haines left her position as deputy national security adviser to President Barack Obama at the end of his term in 2017, and within about six months she was working as a consultant for Palantir. When Haines joined Biden’s transition team over the summer, a spokesperson sought to distance her from Palantir’s data collection and surveillance, saying that the vast majority of her work for the company was related to diversity and inclusion.

The biggest share of Haines’ income came from Columbia University, which paid her more than $440,000 to help run an international research project and to lecture at the university’s law school. She also was paid $150,000 to consult for the applied physics lab at Johns Hopkins University, and nearly $55,000 to consult and make introductions for WestExec Advisors, the firm Blinken helped found.

Blinken, who served as deputy secretary of state in the Obama administration, formed WestExec Advisors about eight months after he left office with three other Obama administration officials.

The firm, which takes its name from the small street that runs between the West Wing of the White House and the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, was hired by clients looking for advice in navigating the federal government. The firm also paired with venture capital funds that helped companies it advised expand to take on federal contracts or other new work.

Blinken’s disclosure forms show that he worked with 17 WestExec clients, including Microsoft, Uber, AT&amp;amp;T, FedEx, LinkedIn, Japanese conglomerate SoftBank, pharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences and McKinsey &amp;amp; Co., a global consulting firm.

WestExec said in a statement after Blinken emerged as the likely secretary of state pick that he helped business leaders “make the best decisions in a complex and volatile international landscape.”

Blinken also publicly defended tech companies, while Facebook was a client of WestExec. When tech companies came under fire for failing to adequately fight disinformation during the 2016 election — including Facebook posts that were part of a Russian effort to boost Trump’s presidential campaign — Blinken said the blame should be directed primarily at Russia.

Tech platforms “have to do better to defend against malicious actors, but let’s not lose sight of the forest for the trees: The problem is Russia and other actors who use our openness against us, not the platforms,” Blinken said in an interview with Fast Company published in October 2017. “The biggest mistake we can make is to get into a circular firing squad with government and the tech companies,” Blinken told the publication, which identified him as an adviser to both Facebook and Alphabet, the parent company of Google.

José Castañeda, a Google spokesperson, said that the company hired WestExec for one month in 2018 to provide advice on tech policy, but added that the advice was “provided by others in the firm, not by Mr. Blinken.”

In 2009, Obama prohibited all of his appointees from participating for two years in “any particular matter” as a government official that “directly and substantially” related to a former employer or former client, including a federal regulation that might affect the former client.

Biden has not yet released details on what type of restrictions he will impose on his political appointees.

President-elect Joe Biden’s choice for Treasury secretary, Janet L. Yellen, collected more than $7 million in speaking fees over the past two years from major corporations and Wall Street banks that have a keen interest in the financial policies she will oversee after her expected confirmation to lead the Treasury Department.

President-elect Joe Biden’s choice for Treasury secretary, Janet L. Yellen, collected more than $7 million in speaking fees over the past two years from major corporations and Wall Street banks that have a keen interest in the financial policies she will oversee after her expected confirmation to lead the Treasury Department. Yellen’s paid speaking appearances — which included $992,000 from investment bank Citi for nine appearances — were among the lucrative payments from a range of Wall Street, Big Tech and corporate interests to three prominent prospective members of the incoming Biden administration. The payments, revealed in disclosure statements covering the previous two years and released on New Year’s Eve, have caused consternation among progressive activists concerned about the influence of special interests around Biden, who they see as part of a Democratic establishment that has not sufficiently embraced liberal priorities. Biden’s choice for secretary of state, Antony J. Blinken, was paid nearly $1.2 million by a consulting firm he helped found, WestExec Advisors, where he advised a range of corporations including Facebook, Boeing, private equity giant Blackstone and asset management company Lazard. Biden’s choice for director of national intelligence, Avril Haines, was paid $180,000 to consult for data-mining company Palantir, which has raised liberal hackles for providing data and surveillance services to law enforcement, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Along with their disclosure statements, Yellen, Blinken and Haines each filed ethics agreements pledging to avoid involvement in specific matters that could affect any holding they still own, or with which they had worked in the past year, unless they receive a written waiver from ethics officials. The three may have to extend the conflict of interest window beyond a year if Biden enacts an expected ethics policy barring officials in his administration from participating for two years in policies that could affect their former business interests. Yellen and Blinken also indicated they would divest their interests in companies, including stock owned by Yellen in major corporations such as AT&amp;T, ConocoPhillips, Dow, Pfizer and Raytheon. Blinken said he would sell his stake in WestExec Advisors as well as a venture capital firm linked to it. Blinken indicated in his disclosure filing that those stakes are worth a total of $1.5 million to $6 million. David Segal, the executive director of the progressive group Demand Progress, said that he still had concerns even though the officials had pledged to abide by conflict of interest rules. “There are almost too many corporate clients to count who have relationships to the respective ambits these designees would steward if confirmed,” he said, adding that “this is an unfortunate circumstance,” particularly as Biden strives to strike a difference between his administration and President Donald Trump’s. In the Trump administration, representatives from corporate America and Wall Street held prominent posts, and conflicts of interest abounded. The filings by Biden’s team offer another glimpse of Washington’s longtime revolving door. Officials whose parties have lost power monetize their insider expertise and connections in the private sector, then head back into government when their party retakes the White House. Yellen, a former Federal Reserve chair, started giving paid speeches in February 2018, which was within a year of the conclusion of her term at the Fed. She was also a consultant to Magellan Financial Group Ltd., an Australia-based investment fund manager, which paid her $125,000. Haines left her position as deputy national security adviser to President Barack Obama at the end of his term in 2017, and within about six months she was working as a consultant for Palantir. When Haines joined Biden’s transition team over the summer, a spokesperson sought to distance her from Palantir’s data collection and surveillance, saying that the vast majority of her work for the company was related to diversity and inclusion. The biggest share of Haines’ income came from Columbia University, which paid her more than $440,000 to help run an international research project and to lecture at the university’s law school. She also was paid $150,000 to consult for the applied physics lab at Johns Hopkins University, and nearly $55,000 to consult and make introductions for WestExec Advisors, the firm Blinken helped found. Blinken, who served as deputy secretary of state in the Obama administration, formed WestExec Advisors about eight months after he left office with three other Obama administration officials. The firm, which takes its name from the small street that runs between the West Wing of the White House and the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, was hired by clients looking for advice in navigating the federal government. The firm also paired with venture capital funds that helped companies it advised expand to take on federal contracts or other new work. Blinken’s disclosure forms show that he worked with 17 WestExec clients, including Microsoft, Uber, AT&amp;T, FedEx, LinkedIn, Japanese conglomerate SoftBank, pharmaceutical company Gilead Sciences and McKinsey &amp; Co., a global consulting firm. WestExec said in a statement after Blinken emerged as the likely secretary of state pick that he helped business leaders “make the best decisions in a complex and volatile international landscape.” Blinken also publicly defended tech companies, while Facebook was a client of WestExec. When tech companies came under fire for failing to adequately fight disinformation during the 2016 election — including Facebook posts that were part of a Russian effort to boost Trump’s presidential campaign — Blinken said the blame should be directed primarily at Russia. Tech platforms “have to do better to defend against malicious actors, but let’s not lose sight of the forest for the trees: The problem is Russia and other actors who use our openness against us, not the platforms,” Blinken said in an interview with Fast Company published in October 2017. “The biggest mistake we can make is to get into a circular firing squad with government and the tech companies,” Blinken told the publication, which identified him as an adviser to both Facebook and Alphabet, the parent company of Google. José Castañeda, a Google spokesperson, said that the company hired WestExec for one month in 2018 to provide advice on tech policy, but added that the advice was “provided by others in the firm, not by Mr. Blinken.” In 2009, Obama prohibited all of his appointees from participating for two years in “any particular matter” as a government official that “directly and substantially” related to a former employer or former client, including a federal regulation that might affect the former client. Biden has not yet released details on what type of restrictions he will impose on his political appointees.

Washington has been lucrative for some on Biden’s team

The State Department’s acting inspector general will step down from his role on Friday, according to a spokesman for the inspector general’s office. The decision came as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s office criticized the watchdog agency regarding a report it published about official trips taken by Pompeo’s wife.

Matthew Klimow, the acting inspector general, was already scheduled to leave his post later this month because of provisions in the Vacancies Reform Act, a law that allows acting officials to serve for no more than 210 days after a role is declared vacant.

It was the latest sign of upheaval in the department’s office of the inspector general, which investigates corruption and wrongdoing at the agency and has had a tumultuous relationship with Pompeo and top officials.

The inspector general’s office on Thursday released a report that said State Department officials did not have sufficient documentation for some official trips taken by Susan Pompeo, Pompeo’s wife. The report said no laws had been broken and that no penalty should be assessed. This is one of two investigations into Pompeo’s potential misuse of government resources.

Shortly after the report was released, Pompeo’s office released a statement saying the couple was “fully vindicated from baseless claims” by Democrats and the media. His office went on to criticize the inspector general’s office for wasting “both time and taxpayer resources on this report.”

Ryan Holden, a spokesman for the inspector general’s office, did not say that Klimow’s departure was because of criticism from Pompeo’s office. He said Klimow’s tenure was “always anticipated” to end and that the departing inspector general had “a desire to return” to the embassy in Turkmenistan, where Klimow was the U.S. ambassador before becoming acting inspector general.

The State Department declined to comment on Klimow’s decision to exit the role earlier than expected.

Klimow’s plans to leave his post this week was reported earlier Thursday by The Washington Post.

In May, President Donald Trump fired a previous inspector general at the State Department, Steve Linick, at Pompeo’s private urging. Linick had opened investigations into Pompeo’s potential misuse of department resources and his effort to push arms sales to Saudi Arabia.

Linick was succeeded by Stephen Akard, who stepped down from his role after less than three months.

Pompeo and his wife are still subject to another investigation into potential misuse of government resources. This one concerns allegations that a political appointee was asked to perform personal and political tasks for Pompeo and his wife, including picking up dry cleaning, making restaurant reservations and walking the family dog, Sherman.

Pompeo has dismissed accusations at the center of that inquiry and has repeatedly refused to meet with inspector general staff on the issue.

The State Department’s acting inspector general will step down from his role on Friday, according to a spokesman for the inspector general’s office. The decision came as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s office criticized the watchdog agency regarding a report it published about official trips taken by Pompeo’s wife.

The State Department’s acting inspector general will step down from his role on Friday, according to a spokesman for the inspector general’s office. The decision came as Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s office criticized the watchdog agency regarding a report it published about official trips taken by Pompeo’s wife. Matthew Klimow, the acting inspector general, was already scheduled to leave his post later this month because of provisions in the Vacancies Reform Act, a law that allows acting officials to serve for no more than 210 days after a role is declared vacant. It was the latest sign of upheaval in the department’s office of the inspector general, which investigates corruption and wrongdoing at the agency and has had a tumultuous relationship with Pompeo and top officials. The inspector general’s office on Thursday released a report that said State Department officials did not have sufficient documentation for some official trips taken by Susan Pompeo, Pompeo’s wife. The report said no laws had been broken and that no penalty should be assessed. This is one of two investigations into Pompeo’s potential misuse of government resources. Shortly after the report was released, Pompeo’s office released a statement saying the couple was “fully vindicated from baseless claims” by Democrats and the media. His office went on to criticize the inspector general’s office for wasting “both time and taxpayer resources on this report.” Ryan Holden, a spokesman for the inspector general’s office, did not say that Klimow’s departure was because of criticism from Pompeo’s office. He said Klimow’s tenure was “always anticipated” to end and that the departing inspector general had “a desire to return” to the embassy in Turkmenistan, where Klimow was the U.S. ambassador before becoming acting inspector general. The State Department declined to comment on Klimow’s decision to exit the role earlier than expected. Klimow’s plans to leave his post this week was reported earlier Thursday by The Washington Post. In May, President Donald Trump fired a previous inspector general at the State Department, Steve Linick, at Pompeo’s private urging. Linick had opened investigations into Pompeo’s potential misuse of department resources and his effort to push arms sales to Saudi Arabia. Linick was succeeded by Stephen Akard, who stepped down from his role after less than three months. Pompeo and his wife are still subject to another investigation into potential misuse of government resources. This one concerns allegations that a political appointee was asked to perform personal and political tasks for Pompeo and his wife, including picking up dry cleaning, making restaurant reservations and walking the family dog, Sherman. Pompeo has dismissed accusations at the center of that inquiry and has repeatedly refused to meet with inspector general staff on the issue.

State department watchdog announces early departure as Pompeo criticizes his office

Even when the question of who will be the next US President seems to have settled, the actual power Joe Biden administration will wield has come to be decided on a single election in Georgia in US. The result of this election will decide which party will control US Senate and thereby the effective strength of Biden administration.

Republican Party currently controls US Senate with 52-48 majority. If Democratic party is able to win two Senate seats from Georgia, Republican Party will lose its majority in the Senate. Democratic Party already controls House of Representatives. Both Senate seats in Georgia are currently held by Republican Party.

Knowing the gravity of the situation, both parties have put in their best efforts to campaign for the Senate elections due next month. Major names from both parties are already addressing the people of Georgia

Former President Barack Obama and Vice President Pence campaigned for opposing candidates in Georgia on Friday (December 4), throwing political muscle into the January runoff elections that will determine control of the U.S. Senate.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/criminal-cruel-and-traitorous-donald-trump-belongs-in-prison-says-his-niece-mary-trump-347718">'Criminal, cruel and traitorous' Donald Trump belongs in prison, says his niece Mary Trump</a>

"You are now once again the center of our civic universe, because the special election in Georgia is going to determine ultimately the course of the Biden presidency and whether Joe Biden and Kamala Harris can deliver legislatively all the commitments they've made," Obama said during a virtual event featuring organized by the Democratic Party of Georgia.

A pair of Georgia U.S. Senate runoffs will be held on January 5 after no candidate won a majority in the Nov. 3 election. Republican Senator David Perdue is seeking re-election against Democratic challenger Jon Ossoff. And Republican incumbent Kelly Loeffler is facing Democrat Raphael Warnock in the other runoff.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/i-wouldnt-demand-it-be-mandatory-biden-on-vaccine-347715">I wouldn't demand it be mandatory: Biden on vaccine</a> 
 
Pence visited Georgia on Friday, where he received a briefing on the pandemic at the Atlanta headquarters of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and then joined a rally for Perdue and Loeffler.

"We're going to keep Georgia. We're going to save the Senate and then we're going to save America," he told supporters.

Trump, a Republican who has still refused to concede to Biden, is scheduled to headline a rally with Perdue and Loeffler on Saturday.

(With Reuters inputs)

Even when the question of who will be the next US President seems to have settled, the actual power Joe Biden administration will wield has come to be decided on a single election in Georgia in US.

Even when the question of who will be the next US President seems to have settled, the actual power Joe Biden administration will wield has come to be decided on a single election in Georgia in US. The result of this election will decide which party will control US Senate and thereby the effective strength of Biden administration. Republican Party currently controls US Senate with 52-48 majority. If Democratic party is able to win two Senate seats from Georgia, Republican Party will lose its majority in the Senate. Democratic Party already controls House of Representatives. Both Senate seats in Georgia are currently held by Republican Party. Knowing the gravity of the situation, both parties have put in their best efforts to campaign for the Senate elections due next month. Major names from both parties are already addressing the people of Georgia Former President Barack Obama and Vice President Pence campaigned for opposing candidates in Georgia on Friday (December 4), throwing political muscle into the January runoff elections that will determine control of the U.S. Senate. Also Read | 'Criminal, cruel and traitorous' Donald Trump belongs in prison, says his niece Mary Trump "You are now once again the center of our civic universe, because the special election in Georgia is going to determine ultimately the course of the Biden presidency and whether Joe Biden and Kamala Harris can deliver legislatively all the commitments they've made," Obama said during a virtual event featuring organized by the Democratic Party of Georgia. A pair of Georgia U.S. Senate runoffs will be held on January 5 after no candidate won a majority in the Nov. 3 election. Republican Senator David Perdue is seeking re-election against Democratic challenger Jon Ossoff. And Republican incumbent Kelly Loeffler is facing Democrat Raphael Warnock in the other runoff. Also Read | I wouldn't demand it be mandatory: Biden on vaccine Pence visited Georgia on Friday, where he received a briefing on the pandemic at the Atlanta headquarters of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and then joined a rally for Perdue and Loeffler. "We're going to keep Georgia. We're going to save the Senate and then we're going to save America," he told supporters. Trump, a Republican who has still refused to concede to Biden, is scheduled to headline a rally with Perdue and Loeffler on Saturday. (With Reuters inputs)

With US Senate majority in the pot, parties bring out big guns for Georgia elections

A lawyer part of current US President Donald Trump's campaign&nbsp;is facing widespread flak for his extreme comments directed at former head of a federal cyber-security agency. Chris Krebs (pictured above), the former head of Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (Cisa) had dismissed claims of fraud in US Presidential Election 2020. Joe DiGenova, the lawyer associated with the Trump campaign, said that Krebs should be "taken out at dawn and shot".

Donald Trump is yet to concede in spite of Joe Biden having a clear lead in the electoral college. Trump has mounted a legal offensive to challenge the validity of US election results.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-probes-pardon-bribery-scheme-no-govt-official-under-investigation-346798">US probes pardon bribery scheme; no govt official under investigation</a> 
 
DiGenova, the Trump campaign lawyer made the extreme comments on The Howie Carr show, a podcast on Youtube. After Digenova made the remarks about Krebs, the host did not challenge his assertions.

Chris Krebs was fired as the head of Cisa not long after he said that US Elections were "most secure".

Although Trump has mounted number of lawsuits against election results, he or his team have not been able to produce substantial evidence and have suffered defeats in various courts.

A lawyer part of current US President Donald Trump's campaign is facing widespread flak for his extreme comments directed at former head of a federal cyber-security agency.

A lawyer part of current US President Donald Trump's campaign is facing widespread flak for his extreme comments directed at former head of a federal cyber-security agency. Chris Krebs (pictured above), the former head of Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (Cisa) had dismissed claims of fraud in US Presidential Election 2020. Joe DiGenova, the lawyer associated with the Trump campaign, said that Krebs should be "taken out at dawn and shot". Donald Trump is yet to concede in spite of Joe Biden having a clear lead in the electoral college. Trump has mounted a legal offensive to challenge the validity of US election results. Also Read | US probes pardon bribery scheme; no govt official under investigation DiGenova, the Trump campaign lawyer made the extreme comments on The Howie Carr show, a podcast on Youtube. After Digenova made the remarks about Krebs, the host did not challenge his assertions. Chris Krebs was fired as the head of Cisa not long after he said that US Elections were "most secure". Although Trump has mounted number of lawsuits against election results, he or his team have not been able to produce substantial evidence and have suffered defeats in various courts.

Ex-US Election cybersecurity chief should be taken out and shot, says Trump lawyer

Democrats were on track early Wednesday to maintain a firm grip on the House, but their path to seizing the Senate majority from Republicans was rapidly narrowing as the two parties continued to fight for control of the levers of power in Congress with the fate of the presidency still uncertain.

Partial results suggested that House Democrats were running strong in many of the competitive districts they swept up in 2018, but they were struggling to make further inroads into the Republican-leaning suburbs, where they had expected a surge powered by discontent with President Donald Trump.

Instead, as votes continued to be counted, Republicans were newly optimistic they could claw back seats, particularly in rural areas and traditionally conservative strongholds in places like Oklahoma City and Staten Island.

The Senate outcome rested on a handful of states where Democrats still hoped to topple incumbent Republicans, but their pickup opportunities were dwindling fast on an unusually large battleground that stretched from Maine to Alaska and could tilt with the presidential results.

At stake was the ability of the next president to fill his Cabinet, appoint judges and pursue his agenda, and the two parties had waged a pitched battle to the end, pummeling voters with advertising backed by record sums of money, totaling hundreds of millions of dollars.

Republicans scored crucial wins in Iowa, Alabama and Montana, and were running stronger than expected in North Carolina and Maine, where the results were still too close to call early Wednesday.

Democrats needed a net gain of three or four seats to take Senate control — depending on whether former Vice President Joe Biden, the Democratic nominee, won the presidency, which would allow his vice president, Kamala Harris, to cast tiebreaking votes.

They flipped seats in Colorado, where John Hickenlooper, the former Democratic governor, easily defeated Sen. Cory Gardner, and in Arizona, where Mark Kelly, a former astronaut, beat Sen. Martha McSally.

But Tommy Tuberville, the former Auburn football coach, easily won back deep-red Alabama from Sen. Doug Jones. In Iowa, the victory by Sen. Joni Ernst over Theresa Greenfield, a Democrat with roots in the state’s farming community, scuttled Democrats’ hopes for a key pickup. And in Montana, Sen. Steve Daines beat back a challenge from the state’s popular Democratic governor, Steve Bullock.

That left both sides closely watching Maine, North Carolina and Georgia, where partial returns showed exceedingly tight races between Republican incumbents and their Democratic challengers.

Earlier, Republicans had breathed a sigh of relief when Sen. John Cornyn was declared the winner in Texas, despite a record turnout, and again when Sen. Lindsey Graham, a close ally of Trump’s, won reelection in South Carolina after a tougher-than-expected race.

In Kentucky, Sen. Mitch McConnell, the top Republican, secured a seventh term, although it was unclear whether he would remain majority leader.

“Tonight, Kentuckians said, ‘We’re not finished yet,’” McConnell told supporters in Louisville. “Kentucky wants more of the policies that built the best economy in our nation’s modern history — not socialism.”

At least one Senate race taking place in Georgia, an unexpectedly competitive battleground this year, was headed for a winner-takes-all January runoff that could decide the balance of the Senate only weeks before Inauguration Day if Tuesday’s contests did not. The state’s other race could also end up in a runoff, but it was too early to be certain.

In the fight for the House, Democrats began the night more clearly on the offensive, bolstered by a stunning fundraising advantage, Republican recruitment failures and Trump’s eroding support in America’s cities and suburbs.

Two years after gaining 41 seats to reclaim the majority, Democrats were trying to push into suburban districts that Republicans had not lost in decades around St. Louis, Indianapolis, Atlanta, Phoenix, Omaha and even once ruby-red parts of Texas.

But while strategists in both parties had said a second blue wave could wash out 10 to 20 Republicans, by Wednesday morning, returns indicated that no such sweep had materialized. A handful of Republican incumbents in newly competitive suburban districts held onto their seats, and some Democrats who had been confident of victories were vanquished, including first-term Rep. Joe Cunningham of South Carolina, who was defeated by Nancy Mace, the first woman to graduate from the Citadel, in his Charleston-based district.

At the same time, Democrats fell short of snatching victories in solidly red districts that the party had hoped to make competitive, and lost more ground in the increasingly conservative rural Midwest, with the defeat of Rep. Collin Peterson of Minnesota, chairman of the Agriculture Committee, who served three decades in Congress.

“We have held the House and now, when — after all the votes are counted, we’ll see how much better we will do than that,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday night. But she also tried to play down Democrats’ lackluster performance.

“It’s not just about the quantity,” she added. “It’s about the quality of leadership that they provide for our country.”

Republicans began the cycle hoping to grab onto Trump’s coattails and a booming economy to wrest back the 30 or so districts he won in 2016 that Democrats claimed two years later. But those hopes were dashed by the pandemic, which has left the economy in tatters and the nation counting more than 230,000 deaths to date.

Still, they found some unexpected bright spots Tuesday night. With Trump making significant inroads among Cuban Americans in Miami, Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, a first-term Democrat, was edged out by Carlos Gimenez, the Miami mayor, and Rep. Donna Shalala lost to Maria Elvira Salazar, a former television anchor.

Republican veterans Ann Wagner of Missouri, Steve Chabot of Ohio and Rodney Davis of Illinois also held off stiff challenges, and Republicans were on track for better-than-expected result in a handful of Texas House races where Democrats had sought pickup opportunities.

The battle for the Senate was being waged on even friendlier turf for Republicans. Although they were defending 23 states, compared with just 12 for Democrats, almost all of them were places that Trump carried in 2016 — creating a real possibility that voters could render a split decision Tuesday, dividing power between the White House and Senate.

For the second election season in a row, Democrats ran with an almost singular focus on health care, blistering Republicans for their campaign to overturn the Affordable Care Act. The law, and its protections of preexisting conditions, took on further resonance in the face of a public health crisis unlike any the nation has seen in generations and the confirmation just a week before Election Day of a Supreme Court justice, Amy Coney Barrett, who Democrats argued would strike down the law.

In race after race, Republicans’ chances appeared to hinge on the unexpected strength of Trump, a polarizing leader who has enraptured their core supporters even as his inflammatory style and unorthodox policy positions have frustrated them and alienated crucial voting blocs. A few Republicans, like Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who was battling for political survival in the race of her career, were willing to wag their fingers at the president, but most knew they could not risk his ire, or the support of his loyal base, if they were to have any shot at reelection.

Worried about Trump’s chances, though, many Republicans closed their campaigns with warnings to voters of the risks posed by putting the White House and Congress under full Democratic control.

In North Carolina, Cal Cunningham, a telegenic Iraq War veteran who led for much of the year, was at grave risk of falling short in his effort to oust Republican Sen. Thom Tillis. Tillis had a lead of nearly 100,000 votes early Wednesday, but North Carolina accepts postmarked mail-in ballots until Nov. 12, making a final call premature.

The race in Maine has been just as steady, with the Democrat, Sara Gideon, the speaker of the state Legislature, threatening to unseat Collins, a four-term Republican and one of the last centrists left in her party. After easily winning reelection in 2014, Collins struggled to stay afloat as her race became a national referendum on the Republican Party, and she was battling to win a majority to avoid activating the state’s newly enacted ranked-choice voting system, which could badly hurt her chances.

“We’ve never given up because that is what we Mainers do — we work hard, we show up for work every day and we get the job done,” Collins told her supporters, addressing them in a snowy parking lot in Bangor. “I wish that I could thank each of you by name, that would take all night — on the other hand, we may be here all night.”

Democrats remained hopeful about two races in Georgia, where Jon Ossoff, a 33-year-old documentary filmmaker, had mounted a strong challenge to Sen. David Perdue, and the Rev. Raphael Warnock was challenging Sen. Kelly Loeffler in a special election to replace the retired Republican senator Johnny Isakson. With multiple Democratic and Republican candidates splitting the vote, Loeffler was headed to a runoff with Warnock, after Republican Rep. Doug Collins conceded. Ossoff and Perdue could end up in a runoff, too, but were both still jockeying to clear the 50% required under Georgia law to win outright.

McConnell, 78, handily beat back a challenge from Amy McGrath, a former fighter pilot. Democrats poured $100 million into the contest, but McGrath never commanded the kind of support in the solidly Republican state to make the incumbent nervous.

Both parties had other targets, but they were considered stretches. For Republicans, the best option was Michigan, where John James, a Black Iraq War veteran who ran for the Senate unsuccessfully in 2018, was trying to unseat Sen. Gary Peters. Democrats believed they had an outside shot of defeating Dan Sullivan in Alaska.

The outcome of the Senate contest promised to heavily shape the next two years in Washington. If Democrats were able to grab control of the House, Senate and White House at once for the first time since 2010, they could abolish the legislative filibuster — the last major vestige of minority rights in the Senate — and push through an ambitious slate of bills on voting rights, gun safety, policing and prescription drug prices. They would most likely reserve much of their political capital for expanding the Affordable Care Act and raising taxes on the wealthy to offset that and other new programs.

Nodding to the possibility of all-Democratic control, McConnell warned during his victory speech: “This is no time to declare war on our institutions because one side is angry that the framers made it hard to achieve radical change.”

But Democrats feared that even if Biden were to win, they could fall short in the Senate, saddling the incoming president with a Republican majority ready to oppose him on nearly every front, dashing liberal hopes and swiping his agenda off the table. Facing a Senate led by McConnell, Biden could even have an uphill battle winning its approval to fill his Cabinet, and he would certainly face opposition to liberal nominees to the federal courts.

Similarly, if Trump were reelected and Democrats controlled both the House and Senate, his second term could be a frustrating exercise in stalemate.

Democrats were on track early Wednesday to maintain a firm grip on the House, but their path to seizing the Senate majority from Republicans was rapidly narrowing as the two parties continued to fight for control of the levers of power in Congress with the fate of the presidency still uncertain.

Democrats were on track early Wednesday to maintain a firm grip on the House, but their path to seizing the Senate majority from Republicans was rapidly narrowing as the two parties continued to fight for control of the levers of power in Congress with the fate of the presidency still uncertain. Partial results suggested that House Democrats were running strong in many of the competitive districts they swept up in 2018, but they were struggling to make further inroads into the Republican-leaning suburbs, where they had expected a surge powered by discontent with President Donald Trump. Instead, as votes continued to be counted, Republicans were newly optimistic they could claw back seats, particularly in rural areas and traditionally conservative strongholds in places like Oklahoma City and Staten Island. The Senate outcome rested on a handful of states where Democrats still hoped to topple incumbent Republicans, but their pickup opportunities were dwindling fast on an unusually large battleground that stretched from Maine to Alaska and could tilt with the presidential results. At stake was the ability of the next president to fill his Cabinet, appoint judges and pursue his agenda, and the two parties had waged a pitched battle to the end, pummeling voters with advertising backed by record sums of money, totaling hundreds of millions of dollars. Republicans scored crucial wins in Iowa, Alabama and Montana, and were running stronger than expected in North Carolina and Maine, where the results were still too close to call early Wednesday. Democrats needed a net gain of three or four seats to take Senate control — depending on whether former Vice President Joe Biden, the Democratic nominee, won the presidency, which would allow his vice president, Kamala Harris, to cast tiebreaking votes. They flipped seats in Colorado, where John Hickenlooper, the former Democratic governor, easily defeated Sen. Cory Gardner, and in Arizona, where Mark Kelly, a former astronaut, beat Sen. Martha McSally. But Tommy Tuberville, the former Auburn football coach, easily won back deep-red Alabama from Sen. Doug Jones. In Iowa, the victory by Sen. Joni Ernst over Theresa Greenfield, a Democrat with roots in the state’s farming community, scuttled Democrats’ hopes for a key pickup. And in Montana, Sen. Steve Daines beat back a challenge from the state’s popular Democratic governor, Steve Bullock. That left both sides closely watching Maine, North Carolina and Georgia, where partial returns showed exceedingly tight races between Republican incumbents and their Democratic challengers. Earlier, Republicans had breathed a sigh of relief when Sen. John Cornyn was declared the winner in Texas, despite a record turnout, and again when Sen. Lindsey Graham, a close ally of Trump’s, won reelection in South Carolina after a tougher-than-expected race. In Kentucky, Sen. Mitch McConnell, the top Republican, secured a seventh term, although it was unclear whether he would remain majority leader. “Tonight, Kentuckians said, ‘We’re not finished yet,’” McConnell told supporters in Louisville. “Kentucky wants more of the policies that built the best economy in our nation’s modern history — not socialism.” At least one Senate race taking place in Georgia, an unexpectedly competitive battleground this year, was headed for a winner-takes-all January runoff that could decide the balance of the Senate only weeks before Inauguration Day if Tuesday’s contests did not. The state’s other race could also end up in a runoff, but it was too early to be certain. In the fight for the House, Democrats began the night more clearly on the offensive, bolstered by a stunning fundraising advantage, Republican recruitment failures and Trump’s eroding support in America’s cities and suburbs. Two years after gaining 41 seats to reclaim the majority, Democrats were trying to push into suburban districts that Republicans had not lost in decades around St. Louis, Indianapolis, Atlanta, Phoenix, Omaha and even once ruby-red parts of Texas. But while strategists in both parties had said a second blue wave could wash out 10 to 20 Republicans, by Wednesday morning, returns indicated that no such sweep had materialized. A handful of Republican incumbents in newly competitive suburban districts held onto their seats, and some Democrats who had been confident of victories were vanquished, including first-term Rep. Joe Cunningham of South Carolina, who was defeated by Nancy Mace, the first woman to graduate from the Citadel, in his Charleston-based district. At the same time, Democrats fell short of snatching victories in solidly red districts that the party had hoped to make competitive, and lost more ground in the increasingly conservative rural Midwest, with the defeat of Rep. Collin Peterson of Minnesota, chairman of the Agriculture Committee, who served three decades in Congress. “We have held the House and now, when — after all the votes are counted, we’ll see how much better we will do than that,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Tuesday night. But she also tried to play down Democrats’ lackluster performance. “It’s not just about the quantity,” she added. “It’s about the quality of leadership that they provide for our country.” Republicans began the cycle hoping to grab onto Trump’s coattails and a booming economy to wrest back the 30 or so districts he won in 2016 that Democrats claimed two years later. But those hopes were dashed by the pandemic, which has left the economy in tatters and the nation counting more than 230,000 deaths to date. Still, they found some unexpected bright spots Tuesday night. With Trump making significant inroads among Cuban Americans in Miami, Rep. Debbie Mucarsel-Powell, a first-term Democrat, was edged out by Carlos Gimenez, the Miami mayor, and Rep. Donna Shalala lost to Maria Elvira Salazar, a former television anchor. Republican veterans Ann Wagner of Missouri, Steve Chabot of Ohio and Rodney Davis of Illinois also held off stiff challenges, and Republicans were on track for better-than-expected result in a handful of Texas House races where Democrats had sought pickup opportunities. The battle for the Senate was being waged on even friendlier turf for Republicans. Although they were defending 23 states, compared with just 12 for Democrats, almost all of them were places that Trump carried in 2016 — creating a real possibility that voters could render a split decision Tuesday, dividing power between the White House and Senate. For the second election season in a row, Democrats ran with an almost singular focus on health care, blistering Republicans for their campaign to overturn the Affordable Care Act. The law, and its protections of preexisting conditions, took on further resonance in the face of a public health crisis unlike any the nation has seen in generations and the confirmation just a week before Election Day of a Supreme Court justice, Amy Coney Barrett, who Democrats argued would strike down the law. In race after race, Republicans’ chances appeared to hinge on the unexpected strength of Trump, a polarizing leader who has enraptured their core supporters even as his inflammatory style and unorthodox policy positions have frustrated them and alienated crucial voting blocs. A few Republicans, like Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who was battling for political survival in the race of her career, were willing to wag their fingers at the president, but most knew they could not risk his ire, or the support of his loyal base, if they were to have any shot at reelection. Worried about Trump’s chances, though, many Republicans closed their campaigns with warnings to voters of the risks posed by putting the White House and Congress under full Democratic control. In North Carolina, Cal Cunningham, a telegenic Iraq War veteran who led for much of the year, was at grave risk of falling short in his effort to oust Republican Sen. Thom Tillis. Tillis had a lead of nearly 100,000 votes early Wednesday, but North Carolina accepts postmarked mail-in ballots until Nov. 12, making a final call premature. The race in Maine has been just as steady, with the Democrat, Sara Gideon, the speaker of the state Legislature, threatening to unseat Collins, a four-term Republican and one of the last centrists left in her party. After easily winning reelection in 2014, Collins struggled to stay afloat as her race became a national referendum on the Republican Party, and she was battling to win a majority to avoid activating the state’s newly enacted ranked-choice voting system, which could badly hurt her chances. “We’ve never given up because that is what we Mainers do — we work hard, we show up for work every day and we get the job done,” Collins told her supporters, addressing them in a snowy parking lot in Bangor. “I wish that I could thank each of you by name, that would take all night — on the other hand, we may be here all night.” Democrats remained hopeful about two races in Georgia, where Jon Ossoff, a 33-year-old documentary filmmaker, had mounted a strong challenge to Sen. David Perdue, and the Rev. Raphael Warnock was challenging Sen. Kelly Loeffler in a special election to replace the retired Republican senator Johnny Isakson. With multiple Democratic and Republican candidates splitting the vote, Loeffler was headed to a runoff with Warnock, after Republican Rep. Doug Collins conceded. Ossoff and Perdue could end up in a runoff, too, but were both still jockeying to clear the 50% required under Georgia law to win outright. McConnell, 78, handily beat back a challenge from Amy McGrath, a former fighter pilot. Democrats poured $100 million into the contest, but McGrath never commanded the kind of support in the solidly Republican state to make the incumbent nervous. Both parties had other targets, but they were considered stretches. For Republicans, the best option was Michigan, where John James, a Black Iraq War veteran who ran for the Senate unsuccessfully in 2018, was trying to unseat Sen. Gary Peters. Democrats believed they had an outside shot of defeating Dan Sullivan in Alaska. The outcome of the Senate contest promised to heavily shape the next two years in Washington. If Democrats were able to grab control of the House, Senate and White House at once for the first time since 2010, they could abolish the legislative filibuster — the last major vestige of minority rights in the Senate — and push through an ambitious slate of bills on voting rights, gun safety, policing and prescription drug prices. They would most likely reserve much of their political capital for expanding the Affordable Care Act and raising taxes on the wealthy to offset that and other new programs. Nodding to the possibility of all-Democratic control, McConnell warned during his victory speech: “This is no time to declare war on our institutions because one side is angry that the framers made it hard to achieve radical change.” But Democrats feared that even if Biden were to win, they could fall short in the Senate, saddling the incoming president with a Republican majority ready to oppose him on nearly every front, dashing liberal hopes and swiping his agenda off the table. Facing a Senate led by McConnell, Biden could even have an uphill battle winning its approval to fill his Cabinet, and he would certainly face opposition to liberal nominees to the federal courts. Similarly, if Trump were reelected and Democrats controlled both the House and Senate, his second term could be a frustrating exercise in stalemate.

Democrats battle for Senate control as they maintain grip on House majority

No matter the land, food is synonymous with emotions. We throw parties when we are happy. Sometimes even eat something to make us feel better in bouts of sadness. But we are true to our salt, and quite proud of our respective culinary traditions. We are passionate about our food.

Pramila Jayapal, US Congresswoman of Indian heritage, got the taste of how strong sentiments around food are.

It started with just a tweet. Jayapal posted a photo of 'Paneer Tikka' and said that it was her comfort food.

"Compulsive, night-before-election activity: make comfort food. That’s paneer tikka tonight, in honor of electing #KamalaHarris Veep tomorrow since she just said on Instagram that her favorite North Indian food is any kind of tikka! Let’s go, people! VOTE! #BidenHarris2020" she tweeted

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Compulsive, night-before-election activity: make comfort food. That’s paneer tikka tonight, in honor of electing <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/KamalaHarris?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#KamalaHarris</a> Veep tomorrow since she just said on Instagram that her favorite North Indian food is any kind of tikka! Let’s go, people! VOTE! <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/BidenHarris2020?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#BidenHarris2020</a> <a href="https://t.co/gqyT7BotgG">pic.twitter.com/gqyT7BotgG</a>
— Pramila Jayapal (@PramilaJayapal) <a href="https://twitter.com/PramilaJayapal/status/1323482279029583872?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 3, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

But...and it's a major but! Many on Twitter disagreed with Jayapal who was saying the tasty looking dish in her tweet was 'Paneer Tikka'.

Paneer Tikka is a north Indian dish that is usually made with Indian cottage cheese along with veggies and is usually barbecued or lightly cooked and eaten from a skewer.

The dish Jayapal cooked appeared more like a curry

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/PaneerTikka?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#PaneerTikka</a> died a premature death in this curry <a href="https://t.co/7fOxVn3gfp">https://t.co/7fOxVn3gfp</a>
— टंकीBaba (@rkgeemail) <a href="https://twitter.com/rkgeemail/status/1323536371567398913?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 3, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

Fans of the dish were so up in arms against Jayapal's tweet that Paneer Tikka started trending. The tweets were full of sarcasm sometimes.

A user posted a picture of a spicy soup, and invited Jayapal to have what he claimed was 'kheer' an Indian sweet dish, far cry from anything spicy.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
ये लो खीर खाओ <a href="https://t.co/yYvAx6Q0NI">pic.twitter.com/yYvAx6Q0NI</a>
— How Dare You Isolated Monk ? (@IsolatedMonk) <a href="https://twitter.com/IsolatedMonk/status/1323536175190011906?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 3, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

Some users were rolling eyes

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
who's gonna tell her that's not paneer tikka... <a href="https://t.co/mejabynS4G">https://t.co/mejabynS4G</a>
— Saanvi is looking for sherlock moots •Zaira stan• (@daisysonofjohn) <a href="https://twitter.com/daisysonofjohn/status/1323528221061599232?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 3, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

Jayapal made a follow-up tweet sharing the recipe and this time, she called the dish 'Paneer Tikka Masala' instead of just 'Paneer Tikka'.

The addition of the word 'masala' took the preparation closer to resembling the one in the photo as 'Paneer Tikka Masala' is a curry dish.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
By popular demand, the recipe for Paneer Tikka Masala, slightly adapted from the fabulous <a href="https://twitter.com/twosleevers?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@twosleevers</a>! You can either eat the tikka on its own, or add the masala (sauce) which is like a curry. Enjoy! <a href="https://t.co/0tNyEZOWN4">pic.twitter.com/0tNyEZOWN4</a>
— Pramila Jayapal (@PramilaJayapal) <a href="https://twitter.com/PramilaJayapal/status/1323506998625755138?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 3, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

So what do you like? Paneer Tikka or Paneer Tikka Masala?

No matter the land, food is synonymous with emotions. We throw parties when we are happy. Sometimes even eat something to make us feel better in bouts of sadness.

No matter the land, food is synonymous with emotions. We throw parties when we are happy. Sometimes even eat something to make us feel better in bouts of sadness. But we are true to our salt, and quite proud of our respective culinary traditions. We are passionate about our food. Pramila Jayapal, US Congresswoman of Indian heritage, got the taste of how strong sentiments around food are. It started with just a tweet. Jayapal posted a photo of 'Paneer Tikka' and said that it was her comfort food. "Compulsive, night-before-election activity: make comfort food. That’s paneer tikka tonight, in honor of electing #KamalaHarris Veep tomorrow since she just said on Instagram that her favorite North Indian food is any kind of tikka! Let’s go, people! VOTE! #BidenHarris2020" she tweeted Compulsive, night-before-election activity: make comfort food. That’s paneer tikka tonight, in honor of electing #KamalaHarris Veep tomorrow since she just said on Instagram that her favorite North Indian food is any kind of tikka! Let’s go, people! VOTE! #BidenHarris2020 pic.twitter.com/gqyT7BotgG — Pramila Jayapal (@PramilaJayapal) November 3, 2020 × But...and it's a major but! Many on Twitter disagreed with Jayapal who was saying the tasty looking dish in her tweet was 'Paneer Tikka'. Paneer Tikka is a north Indian dish that is usually made with Indian cottage cheese along with veggies and is usually barbecued or lightly cooked and eaten from a skewer. The dish Jayapal cooked appeared more like a curry #PaneerTikka died a premature death in this curry https://t.co/7fOxVn3gfp — टंकीBaba (@rkgeemail) November 3, 2020 × Fans of the dish were so up in arms against Jayapal's tweet that Paneer Tikka started trending. The tweets were full of sarcasm sometimes. A user posted a picture of a spicy soup, and invited Jayapal to have what he claimed was 'kheer' an Indian sweet dish, far cry from anything spicy. ये लो खीर खाओ pic.twitter.com/yYvAx6Q0NI — How Dare You Isolated Monk ? (@IsolatedMonk) November 3, 2020 × Some users were rolling eyes who's gonna tell her that's not paneer tikka... https://t.co/mejabynS4G — Saanvi is looking for sherlock moots •Zaira stan• (@daisysonofjohn) November 3, 2020 × Jayapal made a follow-up tweet sharing the recipe and this time, she called the dish 'Paneer Tikka Masala' instead of just 'Paneer Tikka'. The addition of the word 'masala' took the preparation closer to resembling the one in the photo as 'Paneer Tikka Masala' is a curry dish. By popular demand, the recipe for Paneer Tikka Masala, slightly adapted from the fabulous @twosleevers! You can either eat the tikka on its own, or add the masala (sauce) which is like a curry. Enjoy! pic.twitter.com/0tNyEZOWN4 — Pramila Jayapal (@PramilaJayapal) November 3, 2020 × So what do you like? Paneer Tikka or Paneer Tikka Masala?

Why Paneer Tikka was trending on US election day

The U.S. government has not determined what caused some U.S. diplomats and intelligence officers to suffer from a mysterious, debilitating affliction while they were overseas, despite devoting vast resources over more than three years to investigating it, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Wednesday.

Starting in late 2016, dozens of U.S. officials and family members living in Cuba and China or traveling for work in other countries, including Russia, reported contracting an illness that has become known as Havana Syndrome, based on where it first publicly emerged. The symptoms included headaches, memory loss, vertigo, nausea, bloody noses and hearing strange sounds.

Some U.S. officials, including experienced CIA analysts, and scientists believe the victims were targeted by a foreign adversary wielding weaponized microwave radiation. Russia beamed microwaves at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow in the 1970s and 1980s, and it has more recently harassed diplomats and fueled violence against U.S. soldiers.

Other U.S. officials and scientists say the injuries may be the product of a psychological illness, or even pesticides.

Pompeo, who was the CIA director before leading the State Department, said the government was still examining multiple theories in what he described as “a very complicated situation.”

“There is not yet any complete U.S. government analysis which definitively tells us precisely how these all came to be, whether they’re part of a single cohort,” Pompeo said at a news conference.

“There are significant U.S. government resources now, what, three-plus years on, devoted to getting to the bottom of this and then holding those responsible accountable — should we determine that that’s required,” he said.

Pompeo was responding to a reporter’s question about what the State Department was doing to protect diplomats, and why there appeared to be deep disparities in the response to the episode in Cuba compared to the one in China. Pompeo took umbrage at the question.

“Yeah, that question is kind of like, ‘When did you stop beating your wife?’ ” Pompeo said. “Right? Right?”

The question referred to the findings of separate investigations in The New York Times and GQ published Monday. Many U.S. government employees and family members who left China in 2018 after falling ill have had to fight the Trump administration for benefits, and some say that has led to retaliation by the government. Some victims are believed to be permanently injured.

The articles also revealed new victims — CIA officers who had recently made short trips overseas. One suspected attack took place in Moscow. In other cases, the officers were meeting with partner intelligence agencies to discuss plans to counter Russian covert operations, The Times found.

CIA Director Gina Haspel is not convinced Russia carried out attacks that caused the illnesses, officials said. Russia has denied any role.

The investigations led to some lawmakers criticizing the Trump administration over the reported mistreatment of diplomats and spies. The lawmakers are also calling for Pompeo and other top officials to stop concealing information on the suspected attacks.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., said Tuesday that the articles were “deeply troubling and should spur the Trump administration to do everything in its power to protect federal employees from these attacks and investigate the full scope of this threat.”

“These findings should put an end to the foot-dragging, evasiveness and obstruction at the State Department to deliver benefits to all of these injured federal employees and their families, and get to the bottom about what happened,” she added.

A half-dozen U.S. officials told The Times that the Trump administration’s responses to the suspected attacks varied based on political considerations.

In Cuba, where President Donald Trump sought to undo President Barack Obama’s rapprochement, the State Department withdrew all but a handful of U.S. diplomats. It also expelled Cuban diplomats from the United States.

But the administration took a softer approach in China as Trump pursued a trade agreement with Xi Jinping, the authoritarian leader whom the president praises. And Trump has also tried strengthening ties with President Vladimir Putin of Russia.

On Wednesday, Pompeo said “there were no politics attached to this” and it was “patently false, clearly false, unambiguously false” that the administration’s responses to the episodes were conditioned on political goals.

“We don’t want any country around the world to think for a moment that they can do something, and we won’t take serious action,” Pompeo said.

The State Department has refused to provide basic information to Congress about the episodes — even obscuring the number of U.S. government employees and family members affected worldwide. Lawmakers and scientists also fear the department is trying to bury a detailed report on the episodes it received in August from a committee at the National Academies of Sciences.

On Tuesday, after The Times reported on the State Department’s refusal to release the report to the public or Congress, Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Ca., said on Twitter that he had just directed aides to request the report from the department.

He wrote: “There’s no reason @SecPompeo should be hiding this information from the American people.”

Marc Polymeropoulos, a 26-year CIA clandestine officer who retired after the suspected attack in Moscow left him with constant migraines, said Wednesday that the current situation was similar to an earlier instance in which the U.S. government refused to recognize combat injuries. “This is the CIA’s gulf war syndrome,” he said.

The U.S. government has not determined what caused some U.S. diplomats and intelligence officers to suffer from a mysterious, debilitating affliction while they were overseas, despite devoting vast resources over more than three years to investigating it, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Wednesday.

The U.S. government has not determined what caused some U.S. diplomats and intelligence officers to suffer from a mysterious, debilitating affliction while they were overseas, despite devoting vast resources over more than three years to investigating it, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said Wednesday. Starting in late 2016, dozens of U.S. officials and family members living in Cuba and China or traveling for work in other countries, including Russia, reported contracting an illness that has become known as Havana Syndrome, based on where it first publicly emerged. The symptoms included headaches, memory loss, vertigo, nausea, bloody noses and hearing strange sounds. Some U.S. officials, including experienced CIA analysts, and scientists believe the victims were targeted by a foreign adversary wielding weaponized microwave radiation. Russia beamed microwaves at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow in the 1970s and 1980s, and it has more recently harassed diplomats and fueled violence against U.S. soldiers. Other U.S. officials and scientists say the injuries may be the product of a psychological illness, or even pesticides. Pompeo, who was the CIA director before leading the State Department, said the government was still examining multiple theories in what he described as “a very complicated situation.” “There is not yet any complete U.S. government analysis which definitively tells us precisely how these all came to be, whether they’re part of a single cohort,” Pompeo said at a news conference. “There are significant U.S. government resources now, what, three-plus years on, devoted to getting to the bottom of this and then holding those responsible accountable — should we determine that that’s required,” he said. Pompeo was responding to a reporter’s question about what the State Department was doing to protect diplomats, and why there appeared to be deep disparities in the response to the episode in Cuba compared to the one in China. Pompeo took umbrage at the question. “Yeah, that question is kind of like, ‘When did you stop beating your wife?’ ” Pompeo said. “Right? Right?” The question referred to the findings of separate investigations in The New York Times and GQ published Monday. Many U.S. government employees and family members who left China in 2018 after falling ill have had to fight the Trump administration for benefits, and some say that has led to retaliation by the government. Some victims are believed to be permanently injured. The articles also revealed new victims — CIA officers who had recently made short trips overseas. One suspected attack took place in Moscow. In other cases, the officers were meeting with partner intelligence agencies to discuss plans to counter Russian covert operations, The Times found. CIA Director Gina Haspel is not convinced Russia carried out attacks that caused the illnesses, officials said. Russia has denied any role. The investigations led to some lawmakers criticizing the Trump administration over the reported mistreatment of diplomats and spies. The lawmakers are also calling for Pompeo and other top officials to stop concealing information on the suspected attacks. Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., said Tuesday that the articles were “deeply troubling and should spur the Trump administration to do everything in its power to protect federal employees from these attacks and investigate the full scope of this threat.” “These findings should put an end to the foot-dragging, evasiveness and obstruction at the State Department to deliver benefits to all of these injured federal employees and their families, and get to the bottom about what happened,” she added. A half-dozen U.S. officials told The Times that the Trump administration’s responses to the suspected attacks varied based on political considerations. In Cuba, where President Donald Trump sought to undo President Barack Obama’s rapprochement, the State Department withdrew all but a handful of U.S. diplomats. It also expelled Cuban diplomats from the United States. But the administration took a softer approach in China as Trump pursued a trade agreement with Xi Jinping, the authoritarian leader whom the president praises. And Trump has also tried strengthening ties with President Vladimir Putin of Russia. On Wednesday, Pompeo said “there were no politics attached to this” and it was “patently false, clearly false, unambiguously false” that the administration’s responses to the episodes were conditioned on political goals. “We don’t want any country around the world to think for a moment that they can do something, and we won’t take serious action,” Pompeo said. The State Department has refused to provide basic information to Congress about the episodes — even obscuring the number of U.S. government employees and family members affected worldwide. Lawmakers and scientists also fear the department is trying to bury a detailed report on the episodes it received in August from a committee at the National Academies of Sciences. On Tuesday, after The Times reported on the State Department’s refusal to release the report to the public or Congress, Rep. Ted Lieu, D-Ca., said on Twitter that he had just directed aides to request the report from the department. He wrote: “There’s no reason @SecPompeo should be hiding this information from the American people.” Marc Polymeropoulos, a 26-year CIA clandestine officer who retired after the suspected attack in Moscow left him with constant migraines, said Wednesday that the current situation was similar to an earlier instance in which the U.S. government refused to recognize combat injuries. “This is the CIA’s gulf war syndrome,” he said.

US still seeking clues to mystery illness afflicting diplomats and spies

A blast and a large fire injured at least five in Virginia (USA) on Saturday morning (local time). The blast took place in a shopping center in Harrisonburg in Virginia. Cause of the blast is yet unknown and an investigation is underway. Ralph Northam, Governor of Virginia was quoted by media as saying that the fire was due to a gas explosion, Harrisonburg Fire Chief Matt Tobia told reporters that cause of the fire was still being ascertained.

Soon after the blast, locals posted videos on Twitter

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Harrisonburg VA fire and explosion appear to be contained now. Ugly scene, explosion heard and felt miles away <a href="https://t.co/vs3r6BxHaH">pic.twitter.com/vs3r6BxHaH</a>
— Josh Edmonds (@joshdedmonds) <a href="https://twitter.com/joshdedmonds/status/1317463342773116928?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 17, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Harrisonburg is a city of around 50,000 that is home to James Madison University. The university said in its Facebook statement that three of its students were injured due to fire. It added that the injuries were minor. The students, said the university, were part of its US Army ROTC program and were taking part in the ten mile run at the time of the blast. One of the student was hospitalised but was expected to be discharged quickly.

Locals living nearby told TV station WHSV that the blast shook their homes.

A blast and a large fire injured at least five in Virginia (USA) on Saturday morning (local time). The blast took place in a shopping center in Harrisonburg in Virginia.

A blast and a large fire injured at least five in Virginia (USA) on Saturday morning (local time). The blast took place in a shopping center in Harrisonburg in Virginia. Cause of the blast is yet unknown and an investigation is underway. Ralph Northam, Governor of Virginia was quoted by media as saying that the fire was due to a gas explosion, Harrisonburg Fire Chief Matt Tobia told reporters that cause of the fire was still being ascertained. Soon after the blast, locals posted videos on Twitter Harrisonburg VA fire and explosion appear to be contained now. Ugly scene, explosion heard and felt miles away pic.twitter.com/vs3r6BxHaH — Josh Edmonds (@joshdedmonds) October 17, 2020 × Harrisonburg is a city of around 50,000 that is home to James Madison University. The university said in its Facebook statement that three of its students were injured due to fire. It added that the injuries were minor. The students, said the university, were part of its US Army ROTC program and were taking part in the ten mile run at the time of the blast. One of the student was hospitalised but was expected to be discharged quickly. Locals living nearby told TV station WHSV that the blast shook their homes.

US: At least 5 injured in blast, fire at Virginia shopping mall

China has warned USA that it may detain American citizens in China as a response to USA's prosecution of Chinese scholars that have links with Chinese army, Wall Street Journal reported.

The report said that Chinese officials have been conveying this to their US counterparts from summer this year. US Justice Department began arresting and prosecuting Chinese scholars conducting research in US institutions. They were accused of hiding their links with People's Liberation Army (PLA) of China.

Wall Street Journal said that China's message was that the United States should end prosecutions of Chinese scholars in U.S. courts, or Americans in China could find themselves in violation of Chinese law.

The Trump administration has increasingly accused China of suing cyber operations and espionage to steal U.S. technological, military and other know-how in a strategy to supplant the United States as the world's leading financial and military power. Beijing denies the allegations.

In July, the Justice Department said the FBI had arrested three Chinese nationals for allegedly concealing memberships in the Peoples Liberation Army when applying for visas to conduct research at U.S. academic institutions.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-forces-prepare-for-possible-military-invasion-of-taiwan-deploy-hypersonic-missile-336157">China forces prepare for possible military invasion of Taiwan, deploy hypersonic missile</a>

Last month, the United States said it had revoked visas for more than 1,000 Chinese nationals under a presidential measure denying entry to students and researchers deemed security risks, a move China called a violation of human rights.

At the time, a State Department spokeswoman said the United States continued to welcome "legitimate students and scholars from China who do not further the Chinese Communist Party's goals of military dominance."

(With Reuters inputs)

China has warned USA that it may detain American citizens in China as a response to USA's prosecution of Chinese scholars that have links with Chinese army, Wall Street Journal reported.

China has warned USA that it may detain American citizens in China as a response to USA's prosecution of Chinese scholars that have links with Chinese army, Wall Street Journal reported. The report said that Chinese officials have been conveying this to their US counterparts from summer this year. US Justice Department began arresting and prosecuting Chinese scholars conducting research in US institutions. They were accused of hiding their links with People's Liberation Army (PLA) of China. Wall Street Journal said that China's message was that the United States should end prosecutions of Chinese scholars in U.S. courts, or Americans in China could find themselves in violation of Chinese law. The Trump administration has increasingly accused China of suing cyber operations and espionage to steal U.S. technological, military and other know-how in a strategy to supplant the United States as the world's leading financial and military power. Beijing denies the allegations. In July, the Justice Department said the FBI had arrested three Chinese nationals for allegedly concealing memberships in the Peoples Liberation Army when applying for visas to conduct research at U.S. academic institutions. Also Read | China forces prepare for possible military invasion of Taiwan, deploy hypersonic missile Last month, the United States said it had revoked visas for more than 1,000 Chinese nationals under a presidential measure denying entry to students and researchers deemed security risks, a move China called a violation of human rights. At the time, a State Department spokeswoman said the United States continued to welcome "legitimate students and scholars from China who do not further the Chinese Communist Party's goals of military dominance." (With Reuters inputs)

China warns US it may detain Americans over prosecution of Chinese scholars

Democratic Vice Presidential candidate Kamala Harris on Wednesday grilled Donald Trump's nominee for the Supreme Court, on Obamacare. &nbsp;Amy Coney Barrett, who will be a judge in US Supreme Court if US Senate confirms her, is currently facing Senate Judiciary Committee for hearing in order to get clearance. Democratic Party fears that if confirmed, Barrett will be instrumental in striking down Obamacare (Affordable Care Act) that has given health cover to millions of Americans.

Harris asked Barrett whether she knew President Trump was seeking to nominate a judge who would strike down Affordable Care Act.

Without naming the President, Amy Coney Barrett said that she did not recall seeing or hearing those statements.&nbsp;

During the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, Harris also focussed on abortion rights and the record of the woman who held the seat Barrett would fill.

"As the Senate considers filling the seat of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who was straightforward enough in her confirmation hearing to say that the right to choose is, quote, essential to woman's equality, unquote," Harris said. "I would suggest that we not pretend that we don't know how this nominee views a woman's right to choose and make her own health care decisions."

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trumps-supreme-court-pick-says-she-is-not-hostile-to-obamacare-dodges-on-abortion-335070">Trump's Supreme Court pick says she is not 'hostile' to Obamacare, dodges on abortion</a>

Amy Coney Barrett is known for her conservative views on a range of issues. Her confirmation to US Supreme Court will see conservative judges have a 6-3 majority over those having liberal views.

Republican Party has long resented Affordable Care Act brought in effect by former US President Barack Obama. A hearing on the Act is due on November 10.

Amt Coney Barrett opted not to say whether she would step aside from taking part in the hearing as Democrats have requested.

(With Reuters inputs)

Democratic Vice Presidential candidate Kamala Harris on Wednesday grilled Donald Trump's nominee for the Supreme Court, on Obamacare. Amy Coney Barrett, who will be a judge in US Supreme Court if US Senate confirms her, is currently facing Senate Judiciary Committee for hearing in order to get clearance.

Democratic Vice Presidential candidate Kamala Harris on Wednesday grilled Donald Trump's nominee for the Supreme Court, on Obamacare. Amy Coney Barrett, who will be a judge in US Supreme Court if US Senate confirms her, is currently facing Senate Judiciary Committee for hearing in order to get clearance. Democratic Party fears that if confirmed, Barrett will be instrumental in striking down Obamacare (Affordable Care Act) that has given health cover to millions of Americans. Harris asked Barrett whether she knew President Trump was seeking to nominate a judge who would strike down Affordable Care Act. Without naming the President, Amy Coney Barrett said that she did not recall seeing or hearing those statements. During the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing, Harris also focussed on abortion rights and the record of the woman who held the seat Barrett would fill. "As the Senate considers filling the seat of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who was straightforward enough in her confirmation hearing to say that the right to choose is, quote, essential to woman's equality, unquote," Harris said. "I would suggest that we not pretend that we don't know how this nominee views a woman's right to choose and make her own health care decisions." Also Read | Trump's Supreme Court pick says she is not 'hostile' to Obamacare, dodges on abortion Amy Coney Barrett is known for her conservative views on a range of issues. Her confirmation to US Supreme Court will see conservative judges have a 6-3 majority over those having liberal views. Republican Party has long resented Affordable Care Act brought in effect by former US President Barack Obama. A hearing on the Act is due on November 10. Amt Coney Barrett opted not to say whether she would step aside from taking part in the hearing as Democrats have requested. (With Reuters inputs)

Kamala Harris grills Barrett on Obamacare, she sidesteps question

Senator Kamala Harris hit out at Trump administration's response to the coronavirus pandemic and termed it "greatest failure" of any US administration. US remains the worst-hit country in the world with more than 7 million people infected with the deadly virus. Kamala Harris lashed out during Vice-Presidential debate with USA Vice President Mike Pence.

"The American people have witnessed what is the greatest failure of any presidential administration in the history of our country," Harris, running mate to Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, said.

Donald Trump has faced flak from the Opposition over his handling of coronavirus pandemic. He has also faced criticism from the media for the 'lax' approach he had in early days of the pandemic in the US.

Trump has said on record that coronavirus was 'just a flu' and advocated medicines that had not been comprehensively and scientifically proven to help cure coronavirus. Trump dissed wearing mask in public which resulted in his supporters following in his suit. Even when thousands were dying almost daily, Trump was not seen wearing mask during his public appearances. Only when death toll kept on mounting and number of those infected rose exponentially, did Trump wear a mask.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-pence-dont-believe-in-science-kamala-harris-at-us-vice-presidential-debate-333337">Trump, Pence ‘don’t believe in science’: Kamala Harris at US Vice Presidential debate</a>

Trump caught coronavirus infection last week. He again caused furore when he removed his mask on camera.

During the Vice Presidential debate, Mike Pence slammed Kamala Harris for her statements questioning whether a vaccine released under Trump could be trusted due to the intense pressure on the president to tame the pandemic.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/i-am-still-speaking-kamala-harris-stops-pence-from-interrupting-during-us-vp-debate-333362">I am still speaking: Kamala Harris stops Pence from interrupting during US VP Debate</a>

"The fact that you continue to undermine public confidence in a vaccine, if the vaccine emerges during the Trump administration, I think is unconscionable," Pence said.&nbsp;

The US death toll from the pandemic has exceeded 210,000. It remains the worst affected country in the world.

(With inputs from AFP)

Senator Kamala Harris hit out at Trump administration's response to the coronavirus pandemic and termed it "greatest failure" of any US administration. US remains the worst-hit country in the world with more than 7 million people infected with the deadly virus.

Senator Kamala Harris hit out at Trump administration's response to the coronavirus pandemic and termed it "greatest failure" of any US administration. US remains the worst-hit country in the world with more than 7 million people infected with the deadly virus. Kamala Harris lashed out during Vice-Presidential debate with USA Vice President Mike Pence. "The American people have witnessed what is the greatest failure of any presidential administration in the history of our country," Harris, running mate to Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden, said. Donald Trump has faced flak from the Opposition over his handling of coronavirus pandemic. He has also faced criticism from the media for the 'lax' approach he had in early days of the pandemic in the US. Trump has said on record that coronavirus was 'just a flu' and advocated medicines that had not been comprehensively and scientifically proven to help cure coronavirus. Trump dissed wearing mask in public which resulted in his supporters following in his suit. Even when thousands were dying almost daily, Trump was not seen wearing mask during his public appearances. Only when death toll kept on mounting and number of those infected rose exponentially, did Trump wear a mask. Also Read | Trump, Pence ‘don’t believe in science’: Kamala Harris at US Vice Presidential debate Trump caught coronavirus infection last week. He again caused furore when he removed his mask on camera. During the Vice Presidential debate, Mike Pence slammed Kamala Harris for her statements questioning whether a vaccine released under Trump could be trusted due to the intense pressure on the president to tame the pandemic. Also Read | I am still speaking: Kamala Harris stops Pence from interrupting during US VP Debate "The fact that you continue to undermine public confidence in a vaccine, if the vaccine emerges during the Trump administration, I think is unconscionable," Pence said. The US death toll from the pandemic has exceeded 210,000. It remains the worst affected country in the world. (With inputs from AFP)

US Vice-Presidential debate: Kamala Harris blasts Trump govt for 'greatest failure' over COVID-19 pandemic

Vice President Mike Pence and Sen. Kamala Harris sat a dozen feet apart Wednesday, separated by Plexiglas and an ideological chasm, for a 90-minute debate that for all the hype seems unlikely to affect the trajectory of presidential campaign.

Harris wanted to talk about President Donald Trump. Pence wanted to talk about Joe Biden. And neither had much interest in answering any of the questions posed by the moderator — or by the other candidate — leading to a mostly staid series of two-minute set pieces.

It was civil. It was conventional. It was not especially scintillating or revealing. But that was still a vast improvement over the unruly shout-out that Americans suffered through last week in the first presidential debate. It even felt normal — minus the Plexiglas plates erected onstage — as neither candidate focused on the most compelling news development in the nation: Trump’s contracting of the coronavirus, his hospitalization and return to the White House amid unanswered questions about the full nature of his medical status.

By the end of the night, the debate seemed a news cycle or a presidential tweet away from being forgotten, and for a Biden ticket that is ahead in the polls, that is welcome news. That is the first of six takeaways from the lone vice-presidential debate, with 27 days left until Election Day:

The race was not upended.&nbsp;

It was telling that a fly that landed on Pence’s head partway through the debate was among the biggest buzz generators of the night.

For all the high Democratic expectations around Harris and her past debate performances, she did not eviscerate Pence. As for Pence, he turned in an effective, dutiful, conservative case for Trump, the likes of which the president rarely articulates himself.

“There are things the campaigns can use from this,” said Matt Gorman, a Republican strategist. “But the trajectory of the race is in the same place it was 24 hours ago.”

And that trajectory is not good for Trump.

“Mike Pence threw snacks to his base but offered nothing substantive to gain ground,” said Jess O’Connell, a Democratic strategist.

Given the age of Biden, 77, and the fact that this would be a 74-year-old Trump’s final term, it is quite possible that clips from the debate could have a bigger impact on the 2024 race than on 2020.&nbsp;

Harris tried to keep 2020 as a referendum on Trump.&nbsp;

It is not often that the first lines of a debate will be among the most important, but the opening answer from Harris amounted to a succinct summary not just of her strategy for the next 90 minutes, but of the Democratic plan for the final four weeks of the race: “The American people have witnessed what is the greatest failure of any presidential administration in the history of our country.”

She was talking about the coronavirus. And looking straight into the camera, she delivered a devastating critique of the Trump administration’s handling of the pandemic, ticking off a series of blunt and brutal statistics: 210,000 dead, 7 million cases, one in five businesses closed and more than 30 million filing for unemployment.

Harris navigated the potentially tricky waters of attacking the administration without personalizing matters around a president still recovering from the virus.

She accused the administration of muzzling the truth (“They knew, and they covered it up”) and not having a clear path forward (“They still don’t have a plan. They still don’t have a plan”).

And that was just in her first two minutes, which she ended with an exclamation point: “This administration has forfeited their right to reelection.”

Pence had few strong answers, acknowledging the “very challenging time” the nation had been through while trying to focus on some of Trump’s early actions, like suspending travel from China. But his final thought in his first scripted answer was a swipe at Biden, saying that the Democratic plan for COVID-19 of looked “a little bit like plagiarism, which is something Joe Biden knows a little bit about."

It was a sign that …

… Pence wanted to make the election an ideological choice.

Pence was most comfortable on the economy and the traditional Republican message of cutting taxes and regulations, pitching the specifics of the Trump tax cuts in more granular and understandable detail than Trump managed in his own debate performance.

“The American economy — the American comeback is on the ballot,” Pence said.

Over and over, he redirected — sometimes smoothly and sometimes not — questions back to the Biden agenda. When Harris said that Biden would repeal the full Trump tax bill, he pounced, saying that doing so would hike taxes for many Americans ( Harris clarified with Biden’s pledge not to raise taxes on those earning less than $400,000 per year).

The point was not the specifics. It was to frame the election as a choice between competing visions, even if Pence intentionally sought to blur the differences between Harris’ own positions during the primary, such as embracing the Green New Deal and opposing fracking, with those of Biden, who has not taken those same positions.

When in doubt, Pence returned to economics. Such as when he was asked if climate change was an existential threat. Mr. Pence paused, dodged and pivoted to the safe space: “Once again, Sen. Harris is denying the fact that they’re going to raise taxes."

Sara Fagen, a Republican strategist and a former senior official in the George W. Bush White House, praised Pence’s economic focus. “He needed to make the case on the economy, and he’s effectively drawing a contrast between two economic visions for America,” she said.

&nbsp; 
Pence’s interruptions revealed the stage’s gender dynamics.

In the early stretches of the debate, Harris took an extended opportunity not just to defend Biden’s credentials but, step by step, to walk through her own: a former San Francisco district attorney, California attorney general, U.S. senator (“only the second Black woman”) and member of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

“Women always have overcompensate on résumé,” said Alexis Grenell, a Democratic strategist. “Men are evaluated based on potential, and women have to come with receipts. You can hear that in Kamala’s answer.”

There were other gender dynamics at play, including Pence’s regular interruptions.

“I’m speaking,” Harris pushed back at one point. “Mr. Vice President, I’m speaking,” she said at another. “He interrupted me, and I’d like to just finish, please,” she said a third time.

It was hard not to see the interjections and pushback refracted through the lens of gender in a contest where the outsize support of women is lifting the Democratic ticket.

Karen Finney, a Democratic strategist, said that Harris “clearly came prepared with strategies for Pence interrupting, talking over her and running over time.”

“She was no doubt aware of the various dynamics and need to thread the needle on balancing being assertive and letting certain attacks go at points so as not to be seen as 'angry’ or ‘overly aggressive,’ which are common sexist racist tropes about women.” said Finney, who was an adviser on Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign.

Pence, it should be noted, was the only man on the stage Wednesday, with Harris across from him and Susan Page, the Washington bureau chief of USA Today, serving as moderator.

Harris got tangled up on the courts

The weakest moment of the night for Harris came on the courts, when Pence challenged her directly to answer whether she and Biden would endorse expanding the Supreme Court if Trump’s nominee for the current vacancy, Amy Coney Barrett, was seated.

Harris dodged. Pence called her out. And Harris dodged some more.

Pence declared at the end of a squirm-worthy segment: “You gave a non-answer. Joe Biden gave a non-answer. The straight answer is, they are going to pack the Supreme Court if they somehow win this election.”

The Biden campaign has clearly decreed that not answering this question — the former vice president has evaded it himself — is more politically palatable than any actual answer it might give. And on Wednesday night, that put Harris in a bind.

“She will be in media trainings as an example of what not to do when avoiding a question,” said Gorman, the Republican strategist.

With four weeks until the election — and upcoming Supreme Court confirming hearings — it is not clear how long the dodge will remain more tenable than an answer.

Harris eventually returned to familiar and safer ground when it comes to the courts: the Trump administration’s lawsuit seeking to unwind the Affordable Care Act. She turned to the camera to accuse Trump of trying to gut it “literally in the midst of a public health pandemic.”

Pence and Harris spar on race and racial justice.

Harris’ mere presence onstage — the first woman of color on a major party ticket — was a statement in and of itself, an accomplishment Pence acknowledged directly by congratulating her on the “the historic nature of your nomination.”

Still, Pence sought to undercut Harris’ credentials and appeal to Black voters, accusing her of prosecuting more African Americans than whites and saying she did not “lift a finger” for a criminal justice bill that Trump eventually signed.

He elided the inconsistencies of making that argument moments after he had said that it would be an “great insult” to say America was “systemically racist” or that law enforcement officers have an “implicit bias.”

Harris forcefully defended her record. “I will not sit here and be lectured by the vice president on what it means to enforce the laws of our country,” she said.

The two candidates also differed on whether there had been justice for Breonna Taylor, the Black woman who was killed in her home in Louisville, Kentucky, during a police raid. “I don’t believe so,” Harris said. “I trust our justice system,” Pence said of a grand jury decision not to press further charges.

It was a disagreement — but, like much of the night, an expected and uneventful one.

Vice President Mike Pence and Sen. Kamala Harris sat a dozen feet apart Wednesday, separated by Plexiglas and an ideological chasm, for a 90-minute debate that for all the hype seems unlikely to affect the trajectory of presidential campaign.

Vice President Mike Pence and Sen. Kamala Harris sat a dozen feet apart Wednesday, separated by Plexiglas and an ideological chasm, for a 90-minute debate that for all the hype seems unlikely to affect the trajectory of presidential campaign. Harris wanted to talk about President Donald Trump. Pence wanted to talk about Joe Biden. And neither had much interest in answering any of the questions posed by the moderator — or by the other candidate — leading to a mostly staid series of two-minute set pieces. It was civil. It was conventional. It was not especially scintillating or revealing. But that was still a vast improvement over the unruly shout-out that Americans suffered through last week in the first presidential debate. It even felt normal — minus the Plexiglas plates erected onstage — as neither candidate focused on the most compelling news development in the nation: Trump’s contracting of the coronavirus, his hospitalization and return to the White House amid unanswered questions about the full nature of his medical status. By the end of the night, the debate seemed a news cycle or a presidential tweet away from being forgotten, and for a Biden ticket that is ahead in the polls, that is welcome news. That is the first of six takeaways from the lone vice-presidential debate, with 27 days left until Election Day: The race was not upended. It was telling that a fly that landed on Pence’s head partway through the debate was among the biggest buzz generators of the night. For all the high Democratic expectations around Harris and her past debate performances, she did not eviscerate Pence. As for Pence, he turned in an effective, dutiful, conservative case for Trump, the likes of which the president rarely articulates himself. “There are things the campaigns can use from this,” said Matt Gorman, a Republican strategist. “But the trajectory of the race is in the same place it was 24 hours ago.” And that trajectory is not good for Trump. “Mike Pence threw snacks to his base but offered nothing substantive to gain ground,” said Jess O’Connell, a Democratic strategist. Given the age of Biden, 77, and the fact that this would be a 74-year-old Trump’s final term, it is quite possible that clips from the debate could have a bigger impact on the 2024 race than on 2020. Harris tried to keep 2020 as a referendum on Trump. It is not often that the first lines of a debate will be among the most important, but the opening answer from Harris amounted to a succinct summary not just of her strategy for the next 90 minutes, but of the Democratic plan for the final four weeks of the race: “The American people have witnessed what is the greatest failure of any presidential administration in the history of our country.” She was talking about the coronavirus. And looking straight into the camera, she delivered a devastating critique of the Trump administration’s handling of the pandemic, ticking off a series of blunt and brutal statistics: 210,000 dead, 7 million cases, one in five businesses closed and more than 30 million filing for unemployment. Harris navigated the potentially tricky waters of attacking the administration without personalizing matters around a president still recovering from the virus. She accused the administration of muzzling the truth (“They knew, and they covered it up”) and not having a clear path forward (“They still don’t have a plan. They still don’t have a plan”). And that was just in her first two minutes, which she ended with an exclamation point: “This administration has forfeited their right to reelection.” Pence had few strong answers, acknowledging the “very challenging time” the nation had been through while trying to focus on some of Trump’s early actions, like suspending travel from China. But his final thought in his first scripted answer was a swipe at Biden, saying that the Democratic plan for COVID-19 of looked “a little bit like plagiarism, which is something Joe Biden knows a little bit about." It was a sign that … … Pence wanted to make the election an ideological choice. Pence was most comfortable on the economy and the traditional Republican message of cutting taxes and regulations, pitching the specifics of the Trump tax cuts in more granular and understandable detail than Trump managed in his own debate performance. “The American economy — the American comeback is on the ballot,” Pence said. Over and over, he redirected — sometimes smoothly and sometimes not — questions back to the Biden agenda. When Harris said that Biden would repeal the full Trump tax bill, he pounced, saying that doing so would hike taxes for many Americans ( Harris clarified with Biden’s pledge not to raise taxes on those earning less than $400,000 per year). The point was not the specifics. It was to frame the election as a choice between competing visions, even if Pence intentionally sought to blur the differences between Harris’ own positions during the primary, such as embracing the Green New Deal and opposing fracking, with those of Biden, who has not taken those same positions. When in doubt, Pence returned to economics. Such as when he was asked if climate change was an existential threat. Mr. Pence paused, dodged and pivoted to the safe space: “Once again, Sen. Harris is denying the fact that they’re going to raise taxes." Sara Fagen, a Republican strategist and a former senior official in the George W. Bush White House, praised Pence’s economic focus. “He needed to make the case on the economy, and he’s effectively drawing a contrast between two economic visions for America,” she said. Pence’s interruptions revealed the stage’s gender dynamics. In the early stretches of the debate, Harris took an extended opportunity not just to defend Biden’s credentials but, step by step, to walk through her own: a former San Francisco district attorney, California attorney general, U.S. senator (“only the second Black woman”) and member of the Senate Intelligence Committee. “Women always have overcompensate on résumé,” said Alexis Grenell, a Democratic strategist. “Men are evaluated based on potential, and women have to come with receipts. You can hear that in Kamala’s answer.” There were other gender dynamics at play, including Pence’s regular interruptions. “I’m speaking,” Harris pushed back at one point. “Mr. Vice President, I’m speaking,” she said at another. “He interrupted me, and I’d like to just finish, please,” she said a third time. It was hard not to see the interjections and pushback refracted through the lens of gender in a contest where the outsize support of women is lifting the Democratic ticket. Karen Finney, a Democratic strategist, said that Harris “clearly came prepared with strategies for Pence interrupting, talking over her and running over time.” “She was no doubt aware of the various dynamics and need to thread the needle on balancing being assertive and letting certain attacks go at points so as not to be seen as 'angry’ or ‘overly aggressive,’ which are common sexist racist tropes about women.” said Finney, who was an adviser on Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign. Pence, it should be noted, was the only man on the stage Wednesday, with Harris across from him and Susan Page, the Washington bureau chief of USA Today, serving as moderator. Harris got tangled up on the courts The weakest moment of the night for Harris came on the courts, when Pence challenged her directly to answer whether she and Biden would endorse expanding the Supreme Court if Trump’s nominee for the current vacancy, Amy Coney Barrett, was seated. Harris dodged. Pence called her out. And Harris dodged some more. Pence declared at the end of a squirm-worthy segment: “You gave a non-answer. Joe Biden gave a non-answer. The straight answer is, they are going to pack the Supreme Court if they somehow win this election.” The Biden campaign has clearly decreed that not answering this question — the former vice president has evaded it himself — is more politically palatable than any actual answer it might give. And on Wednesday night, that put Harris in a bind. “She will be in media trainings as an example of what not to do when avoiding a question,” said Gorman, the Republican strategist. With four weeks until the election — and upcoming Supreme Court confirming hearings — it is not clear how long the dodge will remain more tenable than an answer. Harris eventually returned to familiar and safer ground when it comes to the courts: the Trump administration’s lawsuit seeking to unwind the Affordable Care Act. She turned to the camera to accuse Trump of trying to gut it “literally in the midst of a public health pandemic.” Pence and Harris spar on race and racial justice. Harris’ mere presence onstage — the first woman of color on a major party ticket — was a statement in and of itself, an accomplishment Pence acknowledged directly by congratulating her on the “the historic nature of your nomination.” Still, Pence sought to undercut Harris’ credentials and appeal to Black voters, accusing her of prosecuting more African Americans than whites and saying she did not “lift a finger” for a criminal justice bill that Trump eventually signed. He elided the inconsistencies of making that argument moments after he had said that it would be an “great insult” to say America was “systemically racist” or that law enforcement officers have an “implicit bias.” Harris forcefully defended her record. “I will not sit here and be lectured by the vice president on what it means to enforce the laws of our country,” she said. The two candidates also differed on whether there had been justice for Breonna Taylor, the Black woman who was killed in her home in Louisville, Kentucky, during a police raid. “I don’t believe so,” Harris said. “I trust our justice system,” Pence said of a grand jury decision not to press further charges. It was a disagreement — but, like much of the night, an expected and uneventful one.

Six takeaways from the vice-presidential debate

A British judge said on Thursday that she would give her decision on extradition of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to US early next year. In the US, Assange may face charges including espionage. Assange faces accuasations from US authorities of conspiring to hack government computers and violating espionage law in connection with the release of confidential cables. These cables were leaked by Wikileaks in 2010-2011.

Assange's lawyer say that the charges against the Australian-born are politically motivated. They also say that Assange's mental health is at risk and that conditions of US prisons are in violation of Britain's human rights laws. They also allege that Julian Assange and his lawyers were spied on while he was in Ecuaorian embassy in the UK.

The legal team representing the United States have countered that many of those arguments are issues which should be addressed in a trial, and have no bearing on extradition.

Judge Vanessa Baraitser told London`s Old Bailey Court at the conclusion of hearings from witnesses in the case that she would deliver her verdict on January 4.

(With Reuters inputs)

A British judge said on Thursday that she would give her decision on extradition of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to US early next year. In the US, Assange may face charges including espionage.

A British judge said on Thursday that she would give her decision on extradition of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange to US early next year. In the US, Assange may face charges including espionage. Assange faces accuasations from US authorities of conspiring to hack government computers and violating espionage law in connection with the release of confidential cables. These cables were leaked by Wikileaks in 2010-2011. Assange's lawyer say that the charges against the Australian-born are politically motivated. They also say that Assange's mental health is at risk and that conditions of US prisons are in violation of Britain's human rights laws. They also allege that Julian Assange and his lawyers were spied on while he was in Ecuaorian embassy in the UK. The legal team representing the United States have countered that many of those arguments are issues which should be addressed in a trial, and have no bearing on extradition. Judge Vanessa Baraitser told London`s Old Bailey Court at the conclusion of hearings from witnesses in the case that she would deliver her verdict on January 4. (With Reuters inputs)

Julian Assange US extradition: UK judge to give verdict early next year

Lisa Murkowski, Republican Party Senator from Alaska said on Sunday that she will not support US President Donald Trump's efforts to appoint a Supreme Court judge before US Presidential Elections due on November 3. Murkowski became second Senator to oppose the efforts after Susan Collins of Maine.

“For weeks, I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election. Sadly, what was then a hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed,” Murkowski said in a statement.

The position at the Supreme Court is vacant after the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Friday. The liberal justice was 87 years old.

Lisa Murkowski said in her statement that she had opposed such a move even in 2016 when a nomination to fill a vacancy was taken up 8 months before Presidential Elections. She said that the window was even smaller this time around.

“I did not support taking up a nomination eight months before the 2016 election to fill the vacancy created by the passing of Justice Scalia,” she added. “We are now even closer to the 2020 election – less than two months out – and I believe the same standard must apply. ”

Murkowski's stand has brought Donald Trump's plans in jeopardy. Trump and Senator Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are trying to fill the position in Supreme Court but the plan may get derailed if more than 3 senators oppose the move. Currently, Republican Party has a majority of 53 in the Senate.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-to-slap-sanctions-on-over-two-dozen-targets-tied-to-iran-arms-328984">US to slap sanctions on over two dozen targets tied to Iran arms</a>

All eyes are now on Mitt Romney, the Senator who is opposed to Donald Trump. Romney was Republican Party's presidential candidate in the year 2012.

He and Donald Trump are not considered to share good equation and Romney had even voted in support of impeachment against Trump.

Lisa Murkowski, Republican Party Senator from Alaska said on Sunday that she will not support US President Donald Trump's efforts to appoint a Supreme Court judge before US Presidential Elections due on November 3.

Lisa Murkowski, Republican Party Senator from Alaska said on Sunday that she will not support US President Donald Trump's efforts to appoint a Supreme Court judge before US Presidential Elections due on November 3. Murkowski became second Senator to oppose the efforts after Susan Collins of Maine. “For weeks, I have stated that I would not support taking up a potential Supreme Court vacancy this close to the election. Sadly, what was then a hypothetical is now our reality, but my position has not changed,” Murkowski said in a statement. The position at the Supreme Court is vacant after the passing of Ruth Bader Ginsburg on Friday. The liberal justice was 87 years old. Lisa Murkowski said in her statement that she had opposed such a move even in 2016 when a nomination to fill a vacancy was taken up 8 months before Presidential Elections. She said that the window was even smaller this time around. “I did not support taking up a nomination eight months before the 2016 election to fill the vacancy created by the passing of Justice Scalia,” she added. “We are now even closer to the 2020 election – less than two months out – and I believe the same standard must apply. ” Murkowski's stand has brought Donald Trump's plans in jeopardy. Trump and Senator Majority Leader Mitch McConnell are trying to fill the position in Supreme Court but the plan may get derailed if more than 3 senators oppose the move. Currently, Republican Party has a majority of 53 in the Senate. Also Read | US to slap sanctions on over two dozen targets tied to Iran arms All eyes are now on Mitt Romney, the Senator who is opposed to Donald Trump. Romney was Republican Party's presidential candidate in the year 2012. He and Donald Trump are not considered to share good equation and Romney had even voted in support of impeachment against Trump.

Lisa Murkowski 2nd GOP Senator against Trump's efforts to appoint judge before elections

The United States on Monday will sanction more than two dozen people and entities involved in Iran`s nuclear, missile and conventional arms programs, a senior US official said, putting teeth behind UN sanctions on Tehran that Washington argues have resumed despite the opposition of allies and adversaries.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, the official said Iran could have enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon by the end of the year and that Tehran has resumed long-range missile cooperation with nuclear-armed North Korea. He did not provide detailed evidence regarding either assertion.

The new sanctions fit into US President Donald Trump`s effort to limit Iran`s regional influence and come a week after US-brokered deals for the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain to normalize ties with Israel, pacts that may coalesce a wider coalition against Iran while appealing to pro-Israel US voters ahead of the Nov. 3 election.

The new sanctions also put European allies, China and Russia on notice that while their inclination may be to ignore the US drive to maintain the UN sanctions on Iran, companies based in their nations would feel the bite for violating them.

Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/iran-says-us-faces-maximum-isolation-as-world-powers-dismiss-sanctions-328980">Iran says US faces 'maximum isolation' as world powers dismiss sanctions</a> 
 
A major part of the new US push is an executive order targeting those who buy or sell Iran conventional arms that was previously reported by Reuters and will also be unveiled by the Trump administration on Monday, the official said.

The Trump administration suspects Iran of seeking nuclear weapons - something Tehran denies - and Monday`s punitive steps are the latest in a series seeking to stymie Iran`s atomic program, which US ally Israel views as an existential threat.

"Iran is clearly doing everything it can to keep in existence a virtual turnkey capability to get back into the weaponization business at a moment`s notice should it choose to do so," the US official told Reuters.

The official argued Iran wants a nuclear weapons capability and the means to deliver it despite the 2015 deal that sought to prevent this by restraining Iran`s atomic program in return for access to the world market.

In May 2018, Trump abandoned that agreement to the dismay of the other parties - Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia - and restored US sanctions that have crippled Iran`s economy.

Iran, in turn, has gradually breached the central limits in that deal, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), including on the size of its stockpile of low-enriched uranium as well as the level of purity to which it was allowed to enrich uranium.

"Because of Iran`s provocative nuclear escalation, it could have sufficient fissile material for a nuclear weapon by the end of this year," the official said without elaborating except to say this was based on "the totality" of information available to the United States, including from the IAEA.

The Vienna-based agency has said Iran only began significantly breaching the 2015 deal`s limits after the US withdrawal and it is still enriching uranium only up to 4.5%, well below the 20% it had achieved before that agreement, let alone the roughly 90% purity that is considered weapons-grade, suitable for an atomic bomb.

"Iran and North Korea have resumed cooperation on a long-range missile project, including the transfer of critical parts," he added, declining to say when such joint work first began, stopped, and then started again. 
Asked to comment on the impending new US sanctions and the US official`s other statements, a spokesman for&nbsp; 
Iran`s mission to the United Nations dismissed them as propaganda and said they would further isolate the United States.

"The US` `maximum pressure` show, which includes new propaganda measures almost every week, has clearly failed miserably, and announcing new measures will not change this fact," the mission`s spokesman, Alireza Miryousefi, told Reuters in an email.

"The entire world understands that these are a part of (the) next US election campaign, and they are ignoring the US` preposterous claims at the UN today. It will only make (the) US more isolated in world affairs," he said.

The White House declined comment in advance of Monday`s announcements.

`Snap&nbsp;back` of&nbsp;UN sanctions?

The US official confirmed Trump will issue an executive order that would allow the United States to punish those who buy or sell conventional arms to Iran with secondary sanctions, depriving them of access to the US market.

The proximate cause for this US action is the impending expiration of a UN arms embargo on Iran and to warn foreign actors - US entities are already barred from such trade - that if they buy or sell arms to Iran they will face US sanctions.

Under the 2015 nuclear deal the UN conventional arms embargo is set to expire on Oct. 18.

The United States says it has triggered a "snap back," or resumption, of virtually all UN sanctions on Iran, including the arms embargo, to come into effect at 8 p.m. on Saturday/0000 GMT on Sunday.

Other parties to the nuclear deal and most UN Security Council members have said they do not believe the United States has the right to reimpose the UN sanctions and that the US move has no legal effect.

On Friday, Britain, France and Germany told the Security Council that UN sanctions relief for Iran - agreed under the 2015 nuclear deal - would continue beyond Sunday, despite Washington`s assertion.

In letters to the Security Council on Saturday, China`s UN Ambassador Zhang Jun and Russia`s UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia both described the US move as "illegitimate" and said the UN sanctions relief for Iran would continue.

Also on Saturday, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told the Security Council he cannot act on the US declaration that UN sanctions had been reimposed because it was not clear whether they had snapped back. 
"It is not for the Secretary-General to proceed as if no such uncertainty exists," he said.

Targets include Iran's nuclear, missile, arms groups

The new executive order will define conventional weapons broadly as any item with a potential military use, meaning it could cover such things as speed boats that Iran retrofits to harass vessels in international waters, the US official told Reuters.

It would also apply to conventional circuit boards that can be used in ballistic missile guidance systems, he added.

The more than two dozen targets to be hit with sanctions on Monday include those involved in Iran`s conventional arms, nuclear and missile programs, the official said, saying some of the targets are already sanctioned under other US programs.

That could prompt criticism that the US move is redundant and designed for public relations purposes to look tough on Iran, a charge critics have made about past US sanctions actions.

Among the targets will be Iran`s "most nefarious arms organizations," about a dozen senior officials, scientists and experts from Iran`s nuclear complex, members of a procurement network that supplies military-grade dual-use goods for Iran`s missile program, and several senior officials involved in Iran`s ballistic missile program, the US official said.

The official declined to name the targets, saying this would be made public on Monday, and stressed that the United States wants to deter foreign companies from dealing with them even if their governments believe this is legally permitted.

"You might have a split in some countries where a foreign government may claim that the UN sanctions don`t snap back but their banks and companies will abide by US sanctions because they want to make sure they are not a future target," he said. 
&nbsp;

The United States on Monday will sanction more than two dozen people and entities involved in Iran`s nuclear, missile and conventional arms programs, a senior US official said, putting teeth behind UN sanctions on Tehran that Washington argues have resumed despite the opposition of allies and adversaries.

The United States on Monday will sanction more than two dozen people and entities involved in Iran`s nuclear, missile and conventional arms programs, a senior US official said, putting teeth behind UN sanctions on Tehran that Washington argues have resumed despite the opposition of allies and adversaries. Speaking on condition of anonymity, the official said Iran could have enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon by the end of the year and that Tehran has resumed long-range missile cooperation with nuclear-armed North Korea. He did not provide detailed evidence regarding either assertion. The new sanctions fit into US President Donald Trump`s effort to limit Iran`s regional influence and come a week after US-brokered deals for the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain to normalize ties with Israel, pacts that may coalesce a wider coalition against Iran while appealing to pro-Israel US voters ahead of the Nov. 3 election. The new sanctions also put European allies, China and Russia on notice that while their inclination may be to ignore the US drive to maintain the UN sanctions on Iran, companies based in their nations would feel the bite for violating them. Also Read | Iran says US faces 'maximum isolation' as world powers dismiss sanctions A major part of the new US push is an executive order targeting those who buy or sell Iran conventional arms that was previously reported by Reuters and will also be unveiled by the Trump administration on Monday, the official said. The Trump administration suspects Iran of seeking nuclear weapons - something Tehran denies - and Monday`s punitive steps are the latest in a series seeking to stymie Iran`s atomic program, which US ally Israel views as an existential threat. "Iran is clearly doing everything it can to keep in existence a virtual turnkey capability to get back into the weaponization business at a moment`s notice should it choose to do so," the US official told Reuters. The official argued Iran wants a nuclear weapons capability and the means to deliver it despite the 2015 deal that sought to prevent this by restraining Iran`s atomic program in return for access to the world market. In May 2018, Trump abandoned that agreement to the dismay of the other parties - Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia - and restored US sanctions that have crippled Iran`s economy. Iran, in turn, has gradually breached the central limits in that deal, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), including on the size of its stockpile of low-enriched uranium as well as the level of purity to which it was allowed to enrich uranium. "Because of Iran`s provocative nuclear escalation, it could have sufficient fissile material for a nuclear weapon by the end of this year," the official said without elaborating except to say this was based on "the totality" of information available to the United States, including from the IAEA. The Vienna-based agency has said Iran only began significantly breaching the 2015 deal`s limits after the US withdrawal and it is still enriching uranium only up to 4.5%, well below the 20% it had achieved before that agreement, let alone the roughly 90% purity that is considered weapons-grade, suitable for an atomic bomb. "Iran and North Korea have resumed cooperation on a long-range missile project, including the transfer of critical parts," he added, declining to say when such joint work first began, stopped, and then started again. Asked to comment on the impending new US sanctions and the US official`s other statements, a spokesman for Iran`s mission to the United Nations dismissed them as propaganda and said they would further isolate the United States. "The US` `maximum pressure` show, which includes new propaganda measures almost every week, has clearly failed miserably, and announcing new measures will not change this fact," the mission`s spokesman, Alireza Miryousefi, told Reuters in an email. "The entire world understands that these are a part of (the) next US election campaign, and they are ignoring the US` preposterous claims at the UN today. It will only make (the) US more isolated in world affairs," he said. The White House declined comment in advance of Monday`s announcements. `Snap back` of UN sanctions? The US official confirmed Trump will issue an executive order that would allow the United States to punish those who buy or sell conventional arms to Iran with secondary sanctions, depriving them of access to the US market. The proximate cause for this US action is the impending expiration of a UN arms embargo on Iran and to warn foreign actors - US entities are already barred from such trade - that if they buy or sell arms to Iran they will face US sanctions. Under the 2015 nuclear deal the UN conventional arms embargo is set to expire on Oct. 18. The United States says it has triggered a "snap back," or resumption, of virtually all UN sanctions on Iran, including the arms embargo, to come into effect at 8 p.m. on Saturday/0000 GMT on Sunday. Other parties to the nuclear deal and most UN Security Council members have said they do not believe the United States has the right to reimpose the UN sanctions and that the US move has no legal effect. On Friday, Britain, France and Germany told the Security Council that UN sanctions relief for Iran - agreed under the 2015 nuclear deal - would continue beyond Sunday, despite Washington`s assertion. In letters to the Security Council on Saturday, China`s UN Ambassador Zhang Jun and Russia`s UN Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia both described the US move as "illegitimate" and said the UN sanctions relief for Iran would continue. Also on Saturday, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres told the Security Council he cannot act on the US declaration that UN sanctions had been reimposed because it was not clear whether they had snapped back. "It is not for the Secretary-General to proceed as if no such uncertainty exists," he said. Targets include Iran's nuclear, missile, arms groups The new executive order will define conventional weapons broadly as any item with a potential military use, meaning it could cover such things as speed boats that Iran retrofits to harass vessels in international waters, the US official told Reuters. It would also apply to conventional circuit boards that can be used in ballistic missile guidance systems, he added. The more than two dozen targets to be hit with sanctions on Monday include those involved in Iran`s conventional arms, nuclear and missile programs, the official said, saying some of the targets are already sanctioned under other US programs. That could prompt criticism that the US move is redundant and designed for public relations purposes to look tough on Iran, a charge critics have made about past US sanctions actions. Among the targets will be Iran`s "most nefarious arms organizations," about a dozen senior officials, scientists and experts from Iran`s nuclear complex, members of a procurement network that supplies military-grade dual-use goods for Iran`s missile program, and several senior officials involved in Iran`s ballistic missile program, the US official said. The official declined to name the targets, saying this would be made public on Monday, and stressed that the United States wants to deter foreign companies from dealing with them even if their governments believe this is legally permitted. "You might have a split in some countries where a foreign government may claim that the UN sanctions don`t snap back but their banks and companies will abide by US sanctions because they want to make sure they are not a future target," he said.

US to slap sanctions on over two dozen targets tied to Iran arms

Just more than a month ago, Beirut was struck by a catastrophe. The blasts at Beirut port were a body blow to Lebanon already cursed by violence. Many blamed Hezbollah for the blasts that were caused by huge stock of Ammonium Nitrate, a highly flammable chemical.

A report in the month of August claimed that the ship that got the supply to Beirut port was owned by a man with links to Hezbollah's bank.

The blast unleashed public anger against the Hezbollah. However, another revelation could make it worse

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-us-hezbollah-is-storing-caches-of-weapons-ammonium-nitrate-across-europe-328511/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The United States has accused the Hezbollah of storing caches of weapons and ammonium nitrate across Europe. The Americans say these supplies are being stored to conduct future attacks under the influence of Iran.&nbsp;

US State Department's counter-terrorism co-ordinator is raising an alarm. He says that the Hezbollah weapons caches have been moved through Belgium to France, Greece, Italy, Spain and Switzerland. More caches of Ammonium Nitrate were discovered or destroyed in France, Italy and Greece.

Also Read | <a href="http://13.235.153.162/world/us-sanctions-lebanese-companies-for-allegedly-funnelling-millions-to-hezbollah-328240">US sanctions Lebanese companies for allegedly funnelling millions to Hezbollah</a> 
 
The US is of the view that Hezbollah hasn't stopped its activities with the blasts in Beirut. The investigation is still on.

Almost 3000 tonnes of Ammonium Nitrate was stored at the port for six years. The explosion in the month of August was felt in Turkey, Syria, Israel Palestine and parts of Europe.

It was one of the most powerful non-nuclear explosions in history. The Hezbollah is said to have a sizeable influence in the running of the port.

After the Beirut blasts, Lebanon's Prime Minister Hassan Diab and his entire cabinet resigned.

But the people are still angry.

A senior Hezbollah leader gave an interview to WION and refused to take any responsibility. However, just making statements will not help the Hezbollah.

The group, that entered politics through militancy seems to have lost the support of the public. Hezbollah may have sizeable political power, but it is now accused of protecting a corrupt political class. With the US now stepping up the heat, Lebanon seems to be slipping out of the hands of Hezbollah.

Just more than a month ago, Beirut was struck by a catastrophe. The blasts at Beirut port were a body blow to Lebanon already cursed by violence. Many blamed Hezbollah for the blasts that were caused by huge stock of Ammonium Nitrate, a highly flammable chemical.

Just more than a month ago, Beirut was struck by a catastrophe. The blasts at Beirut port were a body blow to Lebanon already cursed by violence. Many blamed Hezbollah for the blasts that were caused by huge stock of Ammonium Nitrate, a highly flammable chemical. A report in the month of August claimed that the ship that got the supply to Beirut port was owned by a man with links to Hezbollah's bank. The blast unleashed public anger against the Hezbollah. However, another revelation could make it worse × The United States has accused the Hezbollah of storing caches of weapons and ammonium nitrate across Europe. The Americans say these supplies are being stored to conduct future attacks under the influence of Iran. US State Department's counter-terrorism co-ordinator is raising an alarm. He says that the Hezbollah weapons caches have been moved through Belgium to France, Greece, Italy, Spain and Switzerland. More caches of Ammonium Nitrate were discovered or destroyed in France, Italy and Greece. Also Read | US sanctions Lebanese companies for allegedly funnelling millions to Hezbollah The US is of the view that Hezbollah hasn't stopped its activities with the blasts in Beirut. The investigation is still on. Almost 3000 tonnes of Ammonium Nitrate was stored at the port for six years. The explosion in the month of August was felt in Turkey, Syria, Israel Palestine and parts of Europe. It was one of the most powerful non-nuclear explosions in history. The Hezbollah is said to have a sizeable influence in the running of the port. After the Beirut blasts, Lebanon's Prime Minister Hassan Diab and his entire cabinet resigned. But the people are still angry. A senior Hezbollah leader gave an interview to WION and refused to take any responsibility. However, just making statements will not help the Hezbollah. The group, that entered politics through militancy seems to have lost the support of the public. Hezbollah may have sizeable political power, but it is now accused of protecting a corrupt political class. With the US now stepping up the heat, Lebanon seems to be slipping out of the hands of Hezbollah.

Hezbollah has stashed Ammonium Nitrate across Europe, says US

Oil companies began shutting offshore drilling operations on Sunday as part of preparations in the wake of tropical storm Sally. The storm which is predicted to turn into a hurricane in next two days is currently off the coast of Florida in the Atlantic Ocean.&nbsp;

The landfall of Sally is expected in next two days

Royal Dutch Shell began shutting some of its offshore drilling operations on Sunday.

Tropical Storm Sally is not projected to approach the size or intensity of Hurricane Laura in August, but it will cause up to 12-foot (4.2m) swells offshore, said Jim Foerster, chief meteorologist for DTN, an energy, agriculture and weather data provider.

The storm strengthened as it crept up the warm waters of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico on Sunday, carrying winds that could reach 100 miles per hour (160 kph) ahead of landfall on Tuesday, forecasters said.

Sally was upgraded to an "extremely dangerous" potential Category 2 hurricane. It was about 300 miles (482 km) from the mouth of the Mississippi River and moving at 13 mph, according to the U.S. National Hurricane Center. At 8 a.m. EDT, its sustained winds had increased to 50 mph, the NHC said.

Chevron Corp. and Murphy Oil Corp on Saturday began evacuations from offshore production platforms, spokespeople said. Chevron`s Pascagoula, Mississippi, refinery was implementing storm preparedness procedures, the company said.

Other oil producers with drilling rigs and platforms in the area said they were monitoring the storm and prepared to take action as needed.

Oil companies began shutting offshore drilling operations on Sunday as part of preparations in the wake of tropical storm Sally. The storm which is predicted to turn into a hurricane in next two days is currently off the coast of Florida in the Atlantic Ocean.

Oil companies began shutting offshore drilling operations on Sunday as part of preparations in the wake of tropical storm Sally. The storm which is predicted to turn into a hurricane in next two days is currently off the coast of Florida in the Atlantic Ocean. The landfall of Sally is expected in next two days Royal Dutch Shell began shutting some of its offshore drilling operations on Sunday. Tropical Storm Sally is not projected to approach the size or intensity of Hurricane Laura in August, but it will cause up to 12-foot (4.2m) swells offshore, said Jim Foerster, chief meteorologist for DTN, an energy, agriculture and weather data provider. The storm strengthened as it crept up the warm waters of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico on Sunday, carrying winds that could reach 100 miles per hour (160 kph) ahead of landfall on Tuesday, forecasters said. Sally was upgraded to an "extremely dangerous" potential Category 2 hurricane. It was about 300 miles (482 km) from the mouth of the Mississippi River and moving at 13 mph, according to the U.S. National Hurricane Center. At 8 a.m. EDT, its sustained winds had increased to 50 mph, the NHC said. Chevron Corp. and Murphy Oil Corp on Saturday began evacuations from offshore production platforms, spokespeople said. Chevron`s Pascagoula, Mississippi, refinery was implementing storm preparedness procedures, the company said. Other oil producers with drilling rigs and platforms in the area said they were monitoring the storm and prepared to take action as needed.

Oil companies begin halting US offshore drilling as 'Sally' approaches

As the US Presidential campaign moves into high gear, what issues dominate the American minds? VOANews-WION Partnership special broadcast on US Election 2020

US Election 2020: Trump encourages supporters to try to vote twice; Critics slam Trump's comments

In a tit-for-tat escalation between the two countries, China has ordered the closure of the US consulate in the south-western city of Chengdu. Watch report.

China asks US to shut consulate | Chengdu | Retaliation to Houston consulate closure

US President Donald Trump has now changed his stance on the novel coronavirus and now said that the pandemic will get more before getting better and he also urged all Americans to wear masks. Watch report.

Donald Trump: 'COVID to get worse before it gets better'

European Union leaders on Thursday slammed the United States for imposing a unilateral travel ban for people coming from Europe for 30 days.

Coronavirus Pandemic: Donald Trump cancels trip to Nevada, Colorado

usa-news

Usa News, News on Usa News, stories on Usa News, articles on Usa News, Usa News stories at Wion, Usa News news, Usa News latest news

usa news